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 : ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... : last (25)

Author Topic

Nelak
Speed Mining - Minmatar Carebears
Posted - 2007.02.22 19:52:00 - [241]
 

Originally by: NebulousBlur
My comment is simple.

This is full of awesome. I can't think of any complaints about the proposed changes, or any suggestions.

Can't wait.


Precisely what i was thinking. We love the devs <3 Razz

Nylian
Amarr
Out of Order
Posted - 2007.02.22 19:55:00 - [242]
 

Originally by: Auron Shadowbane
if you introduce capital ship "rats" in missions, what about adding them to 0.0 asteroid belts too?

maybe push battleships down to lowsec (increase income for lowesec people) and make the high-end spawns in 0.0 fly capitals?


make ratting a more trilling thing to do too :)!



Really agree with that. Would also push up the risk vs reward in lowsec... and we know what that means... YARRRR!!

No, I don't really agree with that... I wholeheartedly want it to happen... I think that would be AWESOME.

Gzashon
Terra Incognita
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2007.02.22 19:56:00 - [243]
 

Why not just remove missions entirely? Or, at least, the profitable and challenging ones?

Just be honest about it. I'm fairly horrified by alot of these changes. The first thing that comes to mind is all the cool new whiz-bang features and additions that have been visited upon us recently, like invention (broken), gas cloud harvesting (good luck), boosters (lol), exploration (long thread about one corp losing 2bil in ships to a 10/10+ difficulty plex, and getting one can of loot with about 30k worth of stuff in it).

So, lets make missions follow those changes in design, everything should work out OK.

But seriously, how about actually improving things? Basically you've stripped everything profitable and entertaining in a (gasp!) non-PVP away. You're following the MMO recipe for disaster which has killed or seriously wounded several infamous games, where developers say "OK, you have been playing as you like for...years. Now, you will play the game as we say. Have a nice day". To save yourself from trouble, go to your server farm with a grenade.

The introduction of "well, everything really involves PVP..." is like that famous GWBush quote saying "well, when we're talking about war, we're really talking about peace". Huh?

At least i know, now, when i need to be finished doing missions, at least for money. I'm sorry, i will not risk a CNR and another bil in fittings to lowsec or 0.0 nonsense, especially when my insurance pays out, what 1/20th of the value? Pass. Who would?

Fortunately, "summer and revelations 2" means "fall / winter / spring and revelations 2.x or 3", so we've got some time. By then, i'll have a few options:

1. Be making ISK entirely independent of killing NPCs and doing missions (began my R&D & mining alts a while back, so that's possible)
2. Have my carrier by then, and my cap ship alt trained up (will be in one in mid-summer, so thats fine, and a thanatos isn't so pricey...does insurance cover most of it? I hope. Anyway, be prepared to gamble w/ another 2bil+ in stuff, yay)
3. Be chained to a teamspeak mic every moment i'm in the game just so i can have corp protection and a tiny little box of space to have some degree of safety. Thrilling.

For the predicable people who say "omg move to 0.0", been there, done that, and...why aren't you happy there as it is now? Most of the map is 0.0, and there isn't any shortage of pilots out there. Plus, its arguable that 0.0 ratting and occasional plexes are just as profitable as missions, save for agent rewards. I find that most people who just cant stand people doing the NPC stuff usually are the ones who, well, suck at PvP, and tend to die constantly in real 0.0 combat, and are desparate for poor fools wandering out into unsecured areas so they can get easy kills. Go do what you want in the sandbox, you can sit in a station and endlessly write bad poetry all day in chat, i really don't care, its your game, you're paying for it, do what you want.

I feel bad for people who can't make alts to be specialists to cover their bases. But, look at it this way, at least we all have time to replan our character paths.

Suggestion:

1. FIRST, fix all the other new stuff. Make boosters truly useful. Make exploration and complexes have real, motivating rewards relative to difficulty, instead of cheating players. Do...something with gas clouds, and gas cloud modules. And, for GODS SAKE, just kill the T2 lottery and boost invention up to where it should be, you already have egg on your faces for a certain related scandal...
2. Build on mission levels, starting at 5. Add NEW missions to each level, modify the ones that need it. Dont even think about touching ISK bounties. Improve, not replace.
3. Listen to your players.
4. Learn about "revamps" and what they've done to other games.

Could I adapt? Probably. Would i want to keep playing? In the end, we will see...

Spoon Thumb
Khanid Provincial Vanguard
Vanguard Imperium
Posted - 2007.02.22 19:59:00 - [244]
 


I feel strongly about this line:

Originally by: Oveur


New missions will utilize Exploration and Mini-professions to further expand reward abilities.




enough to make a post in general discussion forum where people actually read stuff.

Anyway, i feel exploration is by defenition not something you can be "sent" off to do by your agent:

"Go to this system and do some scanning, this is what you're looking for: " isn't exploring. I think a much better phrase would be "search and destroy" and maybe i am being perdantic (sp?) but I don't care. IMO agents should have noting to do with exploration

Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:09:00 - [245]
 

I like some of these ideas, I hate some of the others.

I really love the idea of reward sharing for missions, it will encourage mission runners to work together instead of doing everything solo. I think that one change will be for the greatest benefit of us all as it encourages group play without forcing any other change upon players. I like that CCP is adding new content; new content is good and keeps the game fresh. I think that the factional warfare idea is interesting but I'm not insterested in borking my standings with anyone in Empire so I personally won't be participating. I like the idea of taking capitals into harder missions since their only real use right now is alliance warfare. I understand that any mission allowing a capital ship would have to take place in LoSec or 0.0, and I'm fine with that. I'm okay with eliminating of mission 'rat bounties so long as the loot tables or the mission rewards are balanced accordingly.

I don't like that CCP is nerfing level 4 missions, and anyone who doesn't see this as a nerf is sorely mistaken. Level 4s are fine, leave them the way they are. I don't like that all the new mission levels will only be in LoSec but I would be okay with it if they left level 4s alone and didn't limit any of the new agents to 0.0 only.

Introducing a new source of money available only to big alliances is a bad idea as far as I'm concerned. And to those who suggest that mission runners just join/befriend an alliance may not have noticed the massive war going on in 0.0 with all parties involved using spies so not many people in 0.0 are going to be open to taking on new members or letting people play in their sandboxes.

So, in short, leave level 4s the same, add new missions, don't make the new missions 0.0 only, and insure balance in light of reduced bounties.

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:25:00 - [246]
 

Originally by: Anglachel83


Originally by: Callistus

CCP has a vision for a great PVP based game, it seems to me a vocal minority of the playerbase don't understand this and want risk-free reward from running lvl4 missions solo in high-sec. It is not that CCP doesn't understand the playerbase, its that empire carebears are playing the wrong game.


and ratting in 0.0, in totally safe ally system is not equally carebear and risk-free awarding?


Making that system "safe" represents a huge investment of time, resources, and teamwork by a large number of people, with the continual danger that it can all be taken away by another group of people.


Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:28:00 - [247]
 

Originally by: roBurky
This is all nice and stuff, for those that are already doing missions. But it doesn't help me get into the thing.

I'd quite like something to be done so I didn't have to grind through level 1 agents for weeks to get to something worth my time. It would be nice if mission running was possible without being a dedicated mission runner tied to one region of space.


Train those social skill and youwill get to the level 3 very fast.

Borasao
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:36:00 - [248]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Quote:
I'd quite like something to be done so I didn't have to grind through level 1 agents for weeks to get to something worth my time.

Train those social skill and youwill get to the level 3 very fast.


LoL... too bad that doesn't work for some of them IRL :) Yeah... anyone who spends over a couple days to a week grinding L1s trying to get to L2s needs to Learn2Play.

Imbri
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:39:00 - [249]
 

Please dont nerf lvl 4s. They are fine as is. Sad

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:40:00 - [250]
 

I think that it is perfectly acceptable for new higher level missions to be available in lower sec (or even 0.0) space. Current mission runners lose nothing, and stand to gain tremendously if they can prove that they can organize themselves as effectively as the 0.0 corporations do.
Granted, solo mission runners will not be able to be successfull with the most difficult missions, but is that a bad thing? Most every other aspect of EVE requires you to work as a team to reap the richest rewards, including PVP, manufacturing, moon harvesting, mining, etc... and those that don't should. Mission running should be no different.
No one would be forced to do a single thing they do not wish to to maintain the playstyle they are currently accustomed to, only if you want to go to newer and higher levels of gameplay would you have to make some adjustments. This new system would encourage people to take some risks, to work together more closely, to use some strategy to attain their high end goals... all of which are good things and ultimately good for the game and playerbase as a whole.


Toria Nynys
Minmatar
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:43:00 - [251]
 

Oh, CCP - one more thing to consider. Many of the 'professional' mish runners currently fund more than one account because current L4 running mechanics favor 2 or 3 accounts grinding of said mishes.

Now, consider what happens when it's no longer advantageous to do so. (read: a single Drake already tears up L3s so fast the gating factor is travel time. Trivial loot means looting & salvaging is a lose, except for trial ISK farming accounts).



Ricky Starwalker
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:49:00 - [252]
 

I'm not thrilled about this.

1. First, it seems like the wrong way to balance money sinks and money faucets. It's generally more fun to add sinks than to take out faucets. Better to add new features like POS's that drain money than to take away fun features like bounties. I have less fun on missions that don't involve bounties. There's less of a sense of reward when you off a rogue drone than when you off a rat with even a minimal bounty.

2. For similar reasons, why nerf level 4s? Making them easier implies that they'll also pay less. I'd rather see the devs add new money sinks than take away faucets. Create T3 BPOs that cost billions and offer marginal advantages over T2 items; someone will spend the money to purchase them. Create new, ridiculously expensive skills; if you create them, people will buy them.

3. I enjoy PvP as much as the next person, but what's wrong with a separate PvE game? Sure put the best level 5s and 6s in lowsec, but why not include far-less-profitable versions in highsec?

4. Why isn't the focus on making missions more *interesting* and diverse rather than moving their location or adjusting their rewards? World of Warcraft has thousands of distinct quests. Vanguard, EQ2, Lord of the Rings Online -- every new MMO that has a PvE component features a robust quest system. By contrast, EVE has the same few dozen missions that we've all done over and over. I'd much rather see dev resources go into more interesting missions than into nerfing them or transplanting them to highsec, which will take the fun out of them for many a carebear, if they even venture there at all.

Just my 2 isk.

Snabbik Shigen
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:56:00 - [253]
 

From my point of view as a new player... the problem with high-sec vs low-sec is that it's a black/white distinction instead of a gradual change.

High-sec - not much cares or worries, even in 0.5
Low-sec - suddenly have a target painted on my back

If you want the carebears to move into low-sec, then it needs to be more of a gradual change rather then the black/white change of today. Maybe that means that your security status plays more into the equation (folks with high security would have CONCORD come to their rescue in the upper levels of low-sec) or something else.

Maybe you can't pod in low-sec, or can't pod in systems above 0.2. Or maybe shuttles are exempt from combat in 0.3 and above. Or you can pay for a CONCORD escort for a set period.

Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:56:00 - [254]
 

You know, it might be me, but I dont see where running Agent missions, envolves PvP in anyway....I just dont see it... Up till recently its allways been a solo PvE aspect of the game, (which is why I dont do the damn things anymore).

As I said before...level 5-7 agent mission that would include useing capital ships are wrong direction to go...




Juntos
Lions Of Judah
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2007.02.22 20:57:00 - [255]
 

I think that this shows a lack of real thought. The idea of loyalty points being with the corporation not the agent is brilliant and should be done asap. The idea of a loyalty point shop instead of getting random offers is awesome, yes please.

Nerfing lvl 4's, why? they are great as they are. After a year of playing I finally did some concentrated missioning and the progression is spot on at the moment.

Higher levels should be in empire as well as low sec space.

But the problem is not the half-thought-out changes but that they are a poor solution to the problems. The two stated problems here are that there is too much inflation and not enough players are playing the game the way CCP wants them to play it.

Too much inflation? there are two solutions more competition or reduce the amount of cash in the system. One only has to look at the effect on mineral prices that the new regions have had to see that more in the system means cheaper prices. If you reduce the amount of cash in the system you simply end up with less and less reward for the activity. Make rats and missions drop more loot, especially named stuff.

Not enough players are playing eve the way CCP wants us to play it? WTF is this about. You want people to go to low sec, I can understand that 0.0 is cool, but if you want people there you need to make it more likely that they will get there, so more routes into 0.0 space. You want people to pvp, then make the insurance cover the fittings as well and make it cheaper and last longer. I don't mind losing ships, so long as I can replace them in a reasonable time frame.

But what the hell, you are the devs, you aint gonna listen to us :P

DrDethHunter
Caldari
Shoal of the Intrepid Righteousness
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:12:00 - [256]
 

On the Whole it sounds good. But some of us players are not True PvPers. Some of us are basically Merchants and Idustrial People who build stuff and may or may not get envolved in the Combat side of it. And the thing about no bounty isk on npc rats is BS. I am sorry about the word but it is true. Thats how some of us pay for items we need. And Third The sentry Guns are not powerful enough. The Sentry guns at the jump gats in .1 to 1.0 space should have the fire power to take down a titan or What the toughest ship is in about 10 mins. Now if said Titan has support ships helping it stay alive then i can see survivg longer. Also i am talking about 1 sentry tower turret at the gate and not the player owned station guns. If not boosting the power then maybe boosting the faction drop with concord and the empire and it affliates for such criminals acts in empire controlled space. And Finally all caldari ships crusier and above should have some kind of Shield Resistence per lvl add to the ships desription because thats what the race does just galente has the armor resistence or was that armor repair

Reecoh Soltar
Exotic Dancer Talent Agency
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:14:00 - [257]
 

Some good ideas here, especially the LP pooling and group rewards. One suggestion - allow the standing with the corp to be shared as well. That way newer players who join a corp outing to run higher level missions get more than just ISK out of it. Also, the LPs should work with any agent in the corp.

I think encouraging moving to low-sec is good as long as it works as intended (no way to know until tried and I don't think this alone will be enough) but I'm more concerned about 0.0. Getting to 0.0 complexes is pretty much out of the question if you are not part of the alliance that controls the area, and I'm concerned high level agents may end up the same way. Not sure how to address that except make a lot of them. Getting into and out of 0.0 is another concern for small corps. More pipes to 0.0 please.

As for making level 4s easier, not sure that's needed. If it's too uniform then the missions become to easy to quickly. If you implement a way to pick from several, then new players can still start with the easier ones and have goals to work towards w/o having to wait for standings and the next agent level.

Also, if you lower rat bounties in general, how about implementing DED Connections to the game, or base the bounties on standings or something? Make bounties something to work for. Although honestly, I think they are OK now, esp if you plan to reduce the number of opponents in missions.

Keep high-sec missions viable and fun, and make the new stuff dynamic and an option for small corps/gangs.

KaptnSparrow
Caldari
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:16:00 - [258]
 

AWESOME finally soemthing new todo in missio time.

can we have it now?

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:24:00 - [259]
 

Originally by: Woddawick
Originally by: Par'Gellen
Originally by: Wheya
Last but not least encourage people to go to low sec.
Why? This is the thing I don't understand. What is so good about low sec? My considerable experience with it is that it's Empire's cesspool.
You're missing the point.

What you are saying is "there's nothing worth going to low-sec for so why do CCP want us there?"

What CCP are saying is "there's nothing worth going to low-sec for so why not put something worthwhile in there so that people will want to go there".

See the difference?


You are missing the point:
he is saying: "is "there's nothing worth going to low-sec and throw away 300 millions of ship and modules every week for so why do CCP want us there?"
So CCP is saying is "there's nothing worth going to low-sec for so why not put something worthwhile in there so that people will want to go there, and lose some billion of ships every week, oh, don't forget, they are getting to much money, so we must move the good reward mission in low sec too".

So unless the changes are done tinking about the problems most mission runner have evidenced, the end result will be:
poorer mission runners losing plety of ships and not getting the isk to replace them,
some big alliance monopolizing the best agents (like they do for the complex),
a lot of happy pirates as long as the gangkfest continue, and then back on businnes with no people in low sec, with the exception of the Alliance contolled areas, and only members of the pirate corps doing missions and hating those as they are PvPers.

Maybe the idea is to avoid the missions running alts in high sec for the alliances.
No more need to change relog in the other character, they can do all with one.

Mantees
Gallente
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:26:00 - [260]
 

Oveur, your blog rocks. More agent level and more missions are good for EVE.

Please also consider the following:

- Level 1 agents are far too difficult for a new character that just finished his tutorial and now sits in a bad equipped ship. If not only the char is new but also the player, then consider that he is still learning the game.
Maybe level 0.5 agents are needed?


Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:28:00 - [261]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 22/02/2007 21:25:13
Originally by: Callistus
Originally by: Par'Gellen

The only thing they can realistically do to move people into lower sec space it to get rid of the ganktards that fill it.

Risk vs reward. Currently I'd argue that the rewards of low sec aren't worth the risk that the player pirates pose. CCP, rightly so, believe that to fix this they need to increase the rewards of low sec, hence the introduction of higher level missions only avaliable there. I'd be all for increasing the difficulty of belt npcs in low sec as well to move people into the belts, but thats a slightly different topic.

You, on the other hand want to balance it in the other direction by reducing the risks in low sec. Now which one of these options fits with CCP's vision of a "PVP focused" game? If you want risk-free profit, stay in high sec. If you want better profits grow some balls and take some risks.


CCp is not balancing risk vs rewards, as risk is INCREASING (higher value ships to lose), so unless the reward is way higher than now, it si simply not worth it, like now.

simply put, when I have something to do in low sec, I use a disposable frigate and a jumpclone, don't use a BS.

DrDethHunter
Caldari
Shoal of the Intrepid Righteousness
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:30:00 - [262]
 

Also one other thing I believe it was GZASHON who said it the best dont go totally rewriting something improve it, not remove or replace it. Dont let this game go down the toliet like some game like Earth above and Beyond and Star War Galaxies. Both had Great potential but fail because of the constant change and revamping it did. Heed our warnings. Also Make the loot dropping Appropriate the the lvl of mission not some items thats worth 2k tp 30k for lvl 3 mission more like on a lvl 3 mission it should be worth 50k to 200k example would be lvl 3 implnats 2nd best eupiment like the xt-9000 cruisle missle launcheras 2nd best damage cntrol units thing like as loot drops

Caldorous
Gallente
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:53:00 - [263]
 

Originally by: DrDethHunter
Also one other thing I believe it was GZASHON who said it the best dont go totally rewriting something improve it, not remove or replace it. Dont let this game go down the toliet like some game like Earth above and Beyond and Star War Galaxies. Both had Great potential but fail because of the constant change and revamping it did. Heed our warnings. Also Make the loot dropping Appropriate the the lvl of mission not some items thats worth 2k tp 30k for lvl 3 mission more like on a lvl 3 mission it should be worth 50k to 200k example would be lvl 3 implnats 2nd best eupiment like the xt-9000 cruisle missle launcheras 2nd best damage cntrol units thing like as loot drops



The agent system and missions has been really quiet during the last year and a half, i dont see why a change can convert a game into a mess. And dont whine about the mission rewards, they are mosly nerfed because if the rats droped good rewards you could become billionarie with few missions...

Lori Carlyle
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:08:00 - [264]
 

Originally by: Oveur

Alliances get more things to farm with capital ships.
0.5> Missions are now LP based... Great!.. I can walk into a blackmarket storeRolling Eyes and buy crap.. No wait I could use the market.
0.4< space now becomes blobs of mission running pirates so they can get there Sec up faster
Encourages blobs in low security, the higher population requireing pirates to outblob there blob
Shoves PVP up the "PvE" players nose. (this is not so bad, until your in the middle of a nodecrash)



Not all PVP is guns.!!

I've done the alliance warfair (read: nodecrashing)
Mission running (Ok the first time you run the mission then it's boring but better then roid raping)
Trading (made lots of isk from this still good if you have the time..)
Roid **** (Nice when your stressed. Soon to be splatted by the bat)

Givin earlyer blogs, CCP appear to me to be pushing everyone into 0.0 and make it so you can't even find out how to undock unless you scan for it with probes.

I'm in a player corp with a RL friend, he plays while he works and I can for about 1 hour a night and if i'm lucky i might get on for 2-3 hours on the weekend. If this is done then thanks CCP for the memorys and I hope you crash your cars tomorrowTwisted Evil
Your moving eve in a direction that supports the Jobless 12 hour a day players, Well sorry I work.

I'm not asking you to match the game to how I play it, I'm asking you to think about the guy that can't play for 12 hours a day, Plays for fun with RL mates and wants ZERO part in the Cheatin Dev's alliance spying//backstabbing node crashing of 0.0 space.






Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:11:00 - [265]
 

Edited by: Adunh Slavy on 22/02/2007 22:12:19
I am a low sec carebear, if there is such a thing, I go to low sec, but I don't take many risks there and I sure as heck don't run missions in low sec because it is very bad idea. A PVE ship has no chance against a PVP ship when there are also 30 rats shooting at the PVE ship and the PVE ship is possibly webbed and warp jammed.

If you, CCP, want mission runners in low sec, then you must assure players that their mission dead space is 100% secure against attack. To do that, lock the deadspace gate against any one who is either not in the mission runner's gang, corp or alliance and put all missions into deadspace. Missioners will still have to use gates and stations, and miners are still around as well. Pirates will moan at this idea, but let's face it, if a PVE setup pilot doesn't have an assurance, PVE pilots aren't going to go run those missions anyway. To not assure safety is a loose-loose for everyone. By giving assurance, missioners will be willing to populate low sec so that they can run their missions there and mine there. They will have a vested interest in securing the area. That increased population, in it self, will give rise to conflict, on its own, with out the pirates having the easy ganks versus PVE setups.

At the same time, player pirates must get something as well, to make it equitable to the different play styles. To do this, get rid of security status, bye bye, all gone, no more, just get rid of it. Instead of showing someone's sec status on the info sheet, show the player's highest faction standing, be it one of the Empires or one of the Pirate Factions. And grant Loyalty Points for destroying ships that belong to a player of a different faction so long as the victim has standings above a certain level. My follow-on post goes into that and creates something that will benefit player pirates as a way to offset 100% secure deadspace missions and uses factional warfare to do it.

I have some ideas on that, at this link here ...


Leandro Salazar
Quam Singulari
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:12:00 - [266]
 

I wonder how that vocal minority embracing the moving of L4 to lowsec and driveling on about PvE needing to be more like PvP will explain to me how much good a PvP fitted mission ship will do me over a PvE fitted one when I am being ganked by 10 pirates in BSes, Recons and HACs? Rolling Eyes

Rab
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:14:00 - [267]
 

Sounds to me like the majority of empire mission runners will stay where they are now, high sec, running the best thats available, even if the best is lower than it was.

It does however sound like the people out in low sec and 0.0 will now have the option to become more dedicated mission runners, you wait for that 'take down the pos' evening thats canceled because 25 of the alliances 30 capitals are busy on level 7s.

If you cant sell pvp to care bears, take care bearing to the pvpers.

Will these low sec missions with no bounties end up flooding the market with navy ships and other LP buys though? That could be the hidden penalty, not losing bounty isk or tough mission isk, but making all LP deals worth nothing because the 0.0 carebears can earn 200k a mission so dont mind if they get 200 isk per LP

Pang Grohl
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:15:00 - [268]
 

Yay! Reward sharing rocks! Corp-wide LP rocks! The rest is Meh, but entirely livable.

Cries about mission runners being nerfed are completely out of order. The bounties will only be missing from the new higher level missions. Your obscenely farmable level 4 missions will remain available in high-sec space safe from the piwates, plus you get the benefit of corp-wide LP banks to use in an LP reward store.

Those saying that you can't run missions in low-sec, and be prepared for PVP, are talking out their exhaust nozzles. I've been running missions where ever they take me, and only ever been engaged in PVP when I got tangled the undocking chute of a certain Gallente style space station.

Which leads me to a question for all varieties of combat pilots: What precisely is the difference between a PVP setup and a PVE setup? Both need guns, both need tank. What else? E-war? Only if you want to keep your opponent from shooting back (a form of tank, no?). Warp scram? Only if you want to kill, rather than drive off your opponent.
Seems to me that if you go equipped to fight, you're equipped to fight regardless of what you're fighting.

I look forward to the new missions in about a year when I get around to training up for capships. In the meantime I'll enjoy what I've got.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:16:00 - [269]
 

Originally by: Zarch AlDain
Originally by: Hunin
Originally by: Agillious
Originally by: Zigg Omelo
NO LVL 5 IN LOW SEC SPACE.Take it to 0.0

CCP this is your chance to breathe some life into 0.0 and make more ppl move there

Otherwise, lmao at getting this done for the summer.... LaughingLaughing


Show me a space of 0.0 space that isn't already dominated by player entities, and I'll agree to this proposal. Otherwise, all you are doing is hording the best toys (high level missions, high level complexes, moon harvesting, outposts, etc.) for the people that have played the longest.


I completely agree with you. 0.0 space is completely restricted by the large player alliances. Why is it restricted? It is restricted because there are few jump gates from lowsec to 0.0 space. Take the region I live in, Catch. Catch is a border region and there are only 2 entrances to lowsec space from this region. This creates a bottleneck for the entrances to 0.0 for the strongest alliance.

Imagine if there were 10 entrances to Catch (or any border 0.0 region) from both high sec and low sec. Now instead of camping 2 systems, a player alliance has to camp 10 systems. This is almost impossible for any alliance. It will allow more people in to 0.0 systems because the bottleneck systems are increased substantially.


You are joking right? I am in and out of 0.0 all the time, with no permission from any local alliance!

All it takes is a little patience, a few precautions and knowing what you are doing.



With a capital ship and no one seeing the cyno?
Big magic.

Thormbus
Posted - 2007.02.22 22:19:00 - [270]
 

Originally by: Dr Aryandi
The ideas sound promising...there is a fundamental change I would like to see in missions though - and it makes them much more 'PvP'.

At the moment missions are instanced - you go to your agent and he creates a mission for you on the spot. He always has a mission for you, even if 500 go to him at once.

A much better way would be to create the missions...and then various agents and palyers would be bidding for your services to fix the missions.

In an area of space where not many people are missioning agents would keep putting the rewards up and up - desperate for someone to come and get rid of the guristas camping their stargate. On the other hand in motsu the agent would start turning around and saying 'you know what, after we massacred their thousandth fleet the sansha have all gone'.


So spawn the missions, have a number of agents with those missions start offering them on a list. You can then review the list of available missions. The longer a mission is not accepted the higher the reward grows.

Now so long as the number of missions spawned across the galaxy is balanced correctly the mission rewards would even out - harder missions would not be accepted until the reward had risen to be worth it. Mission runners would have to spread ourselves out because our agent starts running out of worthwhile jobs for us to do, etc.

Oh and I don't think you need to move all the level 5+ to low sec. Simply balance them so that without capital ships they are extremely difficult - and also make them much rarer in high sec.
look heres a thought for you....leave the 4's alone where they are as they are add more. 5's want to make them only in .4 fine, but.... if you want to FORCE people into pvp (which is what the dev blog states in a nutshell) heres your chance CCP to shine where other mmorpg have failed in the npc parts of their game. make lvl 5's small missions with say 4-10 enemy ships with accurate DPS(to the player fitted equivilant) that fight as a small gang. with the full effects of mods. say 2 bs 1 BC and 3 t2 frigs fitted for pvp in the mission to "gank" the player (players) warping in.(small gang combos are endless) theres your step toward pvp. and you could make them race/faction specific (imagine a NPC rattelsnake or nightmare with full ship bonuses and guns) then the people running the mission are fitting for pvp and not a npc style mission. i mean all these NPC pirate corps have great ships and fittings but they pop in 4 vollys?? you could do so much more with them and make lvl 5 missions a "Step" into pvp not a fall into debt.as well if and when a pirate or gang shows up they have a fighting chance, not a "NPC" setup
i think capitol ships should be left out of 5's. put them in lvl 6-7 missions and put those agents into .3-.2
but if you go on as stated in the dev blog i see a lot of people ignoring 1-4 missions totally,unless your grinding faction. why risk a 3 bill mission fitted ship in a lvl 5 in low sec,to do the same missions i did in high sec with no pvp risc. thats just stupid the money better be huge for the risc.
leave 4's as they are and make 5's a new bridgeway to pvp.


Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... : 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 https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only