open All Channels
seplocked Missions & Complexes
blankseplocked PETITION against MISSION NERFS
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (14)

Author Topic

raukosen
Posted - 2010.05.31 23:06:00 - [151]
 

Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


Wow
How ****ing dense can you be?

Ildryn
Posted - 2010.06.01 03:11:00 - [152]
 

Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


WOW
What the **** do you need?
A ****ing sign?

That Dev Blog was what level 5 missions were intended to be.
It didn't work out that way for one reason or another but it has now been fixed.
You as a player have to accept that and move on. Stop whining *****.



Goose99
Posted - 2010.06.01 03:28:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: Ildryn
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


WOW
What the **** do you need?
A ****ing sign?

That Dev Blog was what level 5 missions were intended to be.
It didn't work out that way for one reason or another but it has now been fixed.
You as a player have to accept that and move on. Stop whining *****.





That is false. The blog states agents are in lowsec, which is true, not that missions are in lowsec.

You need to man-up and admit that it's only your personal opinion that lvl5 missions should be in lowsec, nothing more (I actually agree with your opinion, by the way). But this does not change the fact that CCP never stated that lvl5 missions are intended to always take place in lowsec. Your opinion is still valid without you trying to create some imaginary CCP statement out of thin air. Try to retain some dignity for yourself.Rolling Eyes

Ildryn
Posted - 2010.06.01 03:48:00 - [154]
 

My own personal jiminy cricket.
Your right.
I do interpret that blog as what i would like it to be.
But instead of all these people trying to change it.
Lets get an official Dev post eh.

Misanthra
Posted - 2010.06.01 03:58:00 - [155]
 

Edited by: Misanthra on 01/06/2010 03:58:23
Originally by: Goose99

You need to man-up and admit that it's only your personal opinion that lvl5 missions should be in lowsec, nothing more (I actually agree with your opinion, by the way). But this does not change the fact that CCP never stated that lvl5 missions are intended to always take place in lowsec. Your opinion is still valid without you trying to create some imaginary CCP statement out of thin air. Try to retain some dignity for yourself.Rolling Eyes



Well if going to low sec to get the mission....running in low sec kind of a logical assumption you are gonna be there. CCP just made that assumption more set in stone in patch is all. If someone enjoyed the money before patch...now they have to decide how much they like the isk after patch.

Take the risk or come back to empire mission hubs. Or come out to null sec. Pick up a fleet ship to defend/attack a pos every now and then for a corp/alliance cta. Besides that, once belts warmed up some damn good money out there with the increased chance for faction/officer spawns with timing and luck. Find a crew with jf service and your stuff magically appears in an empire system for usually low isk per m3 to make it safer.


Lone Provider
Posted - 2010.06.01 04:07:00 - [156]
 

Edited by: Lone Provider on 01/06/2010 04:13:28
Edited by: Lone Provider on 01/06/2010 04:10:45
Originally by: Ildryn
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


WOW
What the **** do you need?
A ****ing sign?

That Dev Blog was what level 5 missions were intended to be.
It didn't work out that way for one reason or another but it has now been fixed.
You as a player have to accept that and move on. Stop whining *****.





"Wah...Wah...Wahhhh! I hate Hi-sec LvL5s cause I can't do them!! "

JEALOUS! JEALOUS! JEALOUS!

1/ This is supposed to be a Petition for people who agree with it, not disagree.

2/ Sounds like all the Haterz of this thread and LvL5s in Hi-sec are those that chose Mining as a career and

actually only wished they could solo a LvL5.

DON'T WORRY! I'm sure you'll have the skills.....one day!Laughing

LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing

Goose99
Posted - 2010.06.01 04:12:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: Misanthra
Edited by: Misanthra on 01/06/2010 03:58:23
Originally by: Goose99

You need to man-up and admit that it's only your personal opinion that lvl5 missions should be in lowsec, nothing more (I actually agree with your opinion, by the way). But this does not change the fact that CCP never stated that lvl5 missions are intended to always take place in lowsec. Your opinion is still valid without you trying to create some imaginary CCP statement out of thin air. Try to retain some dignity for yourself.Rolling Eyes



Well if going to low sec to get the mission....running in low sec kind of a logical assumption you are gonna be there. CCP just made that assumption more set in stone in patch is all. If someone enjoyed the money before patch...now they have to decide how much they like the isk after patch.

Take the risk or come back to empire mission hubs. Or come out to null sec. Pick up a fleet ship to defend/attack a pos every now and then for a corp/alliance cta. Besides that, once belts warmed up some damn good money out there with the increased chance for faction/officer spawns with timing and luck. Find a crew with jf service and your stuff magically appears in an empire system for usually low isk per m3 to make it safer.




Yeah, like how when you pick up highsec lvl4s, it's kinda logical that mission would be in highsec? An assumption is just an assumption, it's either set in stone or it's not. Highsec lvl5s still happen, corps would dump useless alts into lowsec for highsec spawns.

Btw, peanut highsec corps get pwned in null. That pos will be gone before you get acquainted with it.Twisted Evil

Mr Kidd
Posted - 2010.06.01 05:52:00 - [158]
 

Edited by: Mr Kidd on 01/06/2010 05:57:58
Ok let me spell it out for those of you who don't get it.

As a ninja looter salvager I've lost 80% of my income because most of the mission loot salvage values are in the large wrecks. Its pointless for me to only salvage the large wrecks when there is no valuable loot. Ninja looting salvaging was 80% of my income.

Coincidentally, about 80% of mission loot and salvage was from large wrecks. So if you're missioning and now you're not getting valuable loot from large wrecks there's little point in salvaging the wrecks....waste of time better spent doing more missions, IMO. Since the income from a mission is about 55 - 60% LP and bounties, the other 40 - 45% is loot and salvage....which of course is pointless to waste the time collecting if you depended on the large wreck loots and salvage. Now I know that 80% of 40% is not 40%. But if you were looting salvaging all the wrecks which I've already pointed out is beyond the point of diminishing returns from a income/time ratio, then it is even more pointless to continue doing it now. So yeah, the missioners lost 40% of their income. If you can run missions half way decent but not well enough to blitz them then you'd just be an idiot to continue looting and salvaging the mission now after you completed it.

Look, I know all this is guestimation. Considering I ninja'd for oh....8 mos.....increasing my income 6 fold I might just have some insight into where the valuable loot and salvage in a mission is.....large wrecks....and I might have a pretty good feel for the distribution of value in a mission is too. If that's not good enough, well too bad. Firstly, can't be replicated now. And secondly even if I had legit looking "numbers" you still wouldn't still wouldn't get it. BTW, those numbers you quoted for your mission income breakdown.....were those verified? Can I replicate them? The answer is of course, no and no.....so give me a break.

Eugenics Progeny
Hedion University
Posted - 2010.06.01 06:52:00 - [159]
 

signed

Umega
Solis Mensa
Posted - 2010.06.01 06:57:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Mr Kidd
Edited by: Mr Kidd on 01/06/2010 05:57:58
Ok let me spell it out for those of you who don't get it.

As a ninja looter salvager I've lost 80% of my income because most of the mission loot salvage values are in the large wrecks. Its pointless for me to only salvage the large wrecks when there is no valuable loot. Ninja looting salvaging was 80% of my income.

Coincidentally, about 80% of mission loot and salvage was from large wrecks. So if you're missioning and now you're not getting valuable loot from large wrecks there's little point in salvaging the wrecks....waste of time better spent doing more missions, IMO. Since the income from a mission is about 55 - 60% LP and bounties, the other 40 - 45% is loot and salvage....which of course is pointless to waste the time collecting if you depended on the large wreck loots and salvage. Now I know that 80% of 40% is not 40%. But if you were looting salvaging all the wrecks which I've already pointed out is beyond the point of diminishing returns from a income/time ratio, then it is even more pointless to continue doing it now. So yeah, the missioners lost 40% of their income. If you can run missions half way decent but not well enough to blitz them then you'd just be an idiot to continue looting and salvaging the mission now after you completed it.

Look, I know all this is guestimation. Considering I ninja'd for oh....8 mos.....increasing my income 6 fold I might just have some insight into where the valuable loot and salvage in a mission is.....large wrecks....and I might have a pretty good feel for the distribution of value in a mission is too. If that's not good enough, well too bad. Firstly, can't be replicated now. And secondly even if I had legit looking "numbers" you still wouldn't still wouldn't get it. BTW, those numbers you quoted for your mission income breakdown.....were those verified? Can I replicate them? The answer is of course, no and no.....so give me a break.


Heres the best.. logical answer you'll get..

Find A New Job.

Welcome to an MMO.. where **** changes at the snap of the Gods fingers. Where one day a wizard owns a warrior and the next a warrior owns a wizard.

Lucky for you sir.. this is a game backed heavily by a player run economy. You ain't ever going to get 'your' loot back in wrecks.. if anything, CCP will tweak more crap outta of them if they feel a particular item is being melted entirely too much. BUT...

I see what ya did there. I get it now, Kidd. Awwww you little trickster you! Tellin' everyone they idiots to loot n salvage their wrecks this entire time while trying to look like a saint.

Yeaaah.. I noticed the raising salvage item prices too, and its not even been a week of this yet. Funny thing about Supply/Demand.. it works.

Spins Meats
Gallente
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2010.06.01 07:52:00 - [161]
 

Edited by: Spins Meats on 01/06/2010 07:53:32
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


This post, perhaps?
Took me all of three minutes to find; I'm sure there are others, I just can't be bothered doing your homework for you.

For what it's worth from the POV of somebody who used to run a fair number of L4s in order to fund my terrible lowsec PvPing (not replying to anyone in specific, but to a bunch of points that people have brought up earlier in this thread) :

  • Removing meta 0 drops just plain makes sense. Overcompensating with meta3-4 is p dumb, though, creating downwards pressure on the high meta items and (since they reprocess to (edit: practically) nothing) potentially dragging them under the price of meta 0 goods. This will not help noob industrialists

  • L5s are working as intended. They were patently never designed to be solo'd in highsec. Having said that, they're still designed to rely on flawed rat/tower aggro mechanics (else your logistics might get shot up.) I've flown logistics in a bunch of L5s, and the only thing keeping you alive is the fact that the rats won't shoot you once the tank has aggro. Wormholes and sleepers are a far superior implementation of the same concept (the concept being 'PvE that's harder and more fun than L4s').

  • Nerfing ninja salvagers/looters runs contrary to what I would have assumed CCP's intentions were.

  • Once you get to a certain point in the isk:hour/fun:hour relationship, looting becomes completely pointless from an isk/fun/hour standpoint, even if it would have made marginally more isk/hour than blitzing. Obviously once you get your gank to a certain point, this holds true even without accounting for fun (I haven't looted or salvaged an L4 since Apoc 1.5 came out and trashed the salvage market.)

  • PvE in lowsec is by no means majorly dangerous, you just need to think outside of the box. Nobody (well, nobody intelligent) is going to be taking 2B faction-fit pimpwagons through a highsec/lowsec gate, but there's an awful lot of exploration/etc stuff that can be done in a shield buffer-fit PvP setup with a point.

  • Complaining about how a particular change to a game like Eve has nerfed your specific playstyle is, at its heart, completely ****ing selfish. Balance the buff to miners given by nerfing meta0 drops and drone crap with the nerf to miners given by the insurance changes and it seems like miners are getting a fairly neutral deal (although I'm sure somebody in MD has analysed things a LOT better than I have.) Changes to PvE missions are collateral damage. HTFU and deal with it.


Lone Provider
Posted - 2010.06.01 08:05:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: Spins Meats
Edited by: Spins Meats on 01/06/2010 07:53:32
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


This post, perhaps?
Took me all of three minutes to find; I'm sure there are others, I just can't be bothered doing your homework for you.




For what it's worth from the POV of somebody who used to run a fair number of L4s in order to fund my terrible lowsec PvPing (not replying to anyone in specific, but to a bunch of points that people have brought up earlier in this thread) :

  • Removing meta 0 drops just plain makes sense. Overcompensating with meta3-4 is p dumb, though, creating downwards pressure on the high meta items and (since they reprocess to (edit: practically) nothing) potentially dragging them under the price of meta 0 goods. This will not help noob industrialists

  • L5s are working as intended. They were patently never designed to be solo'd in highsec. Having said that, they're still designed to rely on flawed rat/tower aggro mechanics (else your logistics might get shot up.) I've flown logistics in a bunch of L5s, and the only thing keeping you alive is the fact that the rats won't shoot you once the tank has aggro. Wormholes and sleepers are a far superior implementation of the same concept (the concept being 'PvE that's harder and more fun than L4s').

  • Nerfing ninja salvagers/looters runs contrary to what I would have assumed CCP's intentions were.

  • Once you get to a certain point in the isk:hour/fun:hour relationship, looting becomes completely pointless from an isk/fun/hour standpoint, even if it would have made marginally more isk/hour than blitzing. Obviously once you get your gank to a certain point, this holds true even without accounting for fun (I haven't looted or salvaged an L4 since Apoc 1.5 came out and trashed the salvage market.)

  • PvE in lowsec is by no means majorly dangerous, you just need to think outside of the box. Nobody (well, nobody intelligent) is going to be taking 2B faction-fit pimpwagons through a highsec/lowsec gate, but there's an awful lot of exploration/etc stuff that can be done in a shield buffer-fit PvP setup with a point.

  • Complaining about how a particular change to a game like Eve has nerfed your specific playstyle is, at its heart, completely ****ing selfish. Balance the buff to miners given by nerfing meta0 drops and drone crap with the nerf to miners given by the insurance changes and it seems like miners are getting a fairly neutral deal (although I'm sure somebody in MD has analysed things a LOT better than I have.) Changes to PvE missions are collateral damage. HTFU and deal with it.





I looked at your link, lol. So, CCP said:

DON'T COUNT ON THAT LASTING FOREVER!!!

Don't count on what lasting forever, LvL5s? LvL5 Agents in Low-sec? High-sec won't last forever?

I still don't see where CCP has written what you say they have!

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2010.06.01 08:05:00 - [163]
 

Quote:

Ok let me spell it out for those of you who don't get it.

As a ninja looter salvager I've lost 80% of my income because most of the mission loot salvage values are in the large wrecks.



Excuse me, 95% of the ninjas that (try to) take my stuff are exclusively after the salvage (cheaper and quicker ship to use, don't become shootable and so on).

Now, I am doing L4 left and right but I did not notice ANY change in the salvage.

So, what did you exactly lose? What the huge majority of ninjas don't even bother to take?

NAVi Slayer
Posted - 2010.06.01 08:17:00 - [164]
 

I must agree, L5 mission in low sec is like doing kamikadze. One mission = one lost ship. And why? Because many pirates wait for chance to easy hit.

I hope, that CCP find good solution of this problem.

Spins Meats
Gallente
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2010.06.01 09:14:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: Lone Provider

I looked at your link, lol. So, CCP said:

DON'T COUNT ON THAT LASTING FOREVER!!!

Don't count on what lasting forever, LvL5s? LvL5 Agents in Low-sec? High-sec won't last forever?



Your inability to read for meaning does not constitute a failure on CCP's part. Let me spell it out for you:

"goazer" said "Wrong, agents are in lowsec, but if the next door system is in highsec, you will get lvl 5 missions to highsec too.", to which CCP Dropbear replied "Don't count on that lasting forever. YARRRR!!".

Since the point of discussion in the thread was whether l5s existed in highsec or not, it seems reasonably obvious to anybody with a pulse that the subject of Dropbear's comment was highsec l5s.

Originally by: Lone Provider

I still don't see where CCP has written what you say they have!

I didn't say they had said anything. "1ofMany" said
Originally by: 1ofMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.
I replied with a quote which clearly refutes that point.

Your obvious sophistry is self evident and cheap. Pathetic.

0/10.

Vitamin B12
Posted - 2010.06.01 09:25:00 - [166]
 

well funny that nobody said that a CRUISER/BATTLECRUISER drop more isk in loot then a BATTLESHIP after the patch. i mean WTF?!

and why the **** does a battleship drop 1 metalscraps... i mean it like ccp says: "hey bro you know the 1 metal scrap could be a normal bs loot but we just patched it hahaha". seriously why 1 metal scraps????

1OfMany
Posted - 2010.06.01 09:35:00 - [167]
 

Edited by: 1OfMany on 01/06/2010 09:46:01
Edited by: 1OfMany on 01/06/2010 09:45:11
Originally by: Spins Meats
Edited by: Spins Meats on 01/06/2010 07:53:32
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


This post, perhaps?
Took me all of three minutes to find; I'm sure there are others, I just can't be bothered doing your homework for you.



OMG .... a CCP reply with the remark 'DONT COUNT ON IT TO LAST'..... i've seen it and i dont add value to it unless it's part of the original expansion or patch notes.

You must be into the category that believes every politicians promise of change...
Or that everything CCP has promised in the past years will still come true as well as all the minor frustrating bugs will be fixed in the next expansion..

My point still stands, that remark of the CCP Dropbear does not mean it is intended to be lowsec from the start if you wish to read it whatever way. The ONLY thing i conclude from this remark besides that it aint official is that they MIGHT reconsider the official implementation and change it accordingly in some future patch/expansion.

Nothing more , nothing less...

1OfMany
Posted - 2010.06.01 09:41:00 - [168]
 

Originally by: Lone Provider
Edited by: Lone Provider on 01/06/2010 04:13:28
Edited by: Lone Provider on 01/06/2010 04:10:45
Originally by: Ildryn
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


WOW
What the **** do you need?
A ****ing sign?

That Dev Blog was what level 5 missions were intended to be.
It didn't work out that way for one reason or another but it has now been fixed.
You as a player have to accept that and move on. Stop whining *****.





"Wah...Wah...Wahhhh! I hate Hi-sec LvL5s cause I can't do them!! "

JEALOUS! JEALOUS! JEALOUS!

1/ This is supposed to be a Petition for people who agree with it, not disagree.

2/ Sounds like all the Haterz of this thread and LvL5s in Hi-sec are those that chose Mining as a career and

actually only wished they could solo a LvL5.

DON'T WORRY! I'm sure you'll have the skills.....one day!Laughing

LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing


He might have the skills, but not the security status to go there.... all fore and against people have their own (economic) agenda for their stand....

Vitamin B12
Posted - 2010.06.01 09:58:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: 1OfMany
Edited by: 1OfMany on 01/06/2010 09:46:01
Edited by: 1OfMany on 01/06/2010 09:45:11
Originally by: Spins Meats
Edited by: Spins Meats on 01/06/2010 07:53:32
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


This post, perhaps?
Took me all of three minutes to find; I'm sure there are others, I just can't be bothered doing your homework for you.



OMG .... a CCP reply with the remark 'DONT COUNT ON IT TO LAST'..... i've seen it and i dont add value to it unless it's part of the original expansion or patch notes.

You must be into the category that believes every politicians promise of change...
Or that everything CCP has promised in the past years will still come true as well as all the minor frustrating bugs will be fixed in the next expansion..

My point still stands, that remark of the CCP Dropbear does not mean it is intended to be lowsec from the start if you wish to read it whatever way. The ONLY thing i conclude from this remark besides that it aint official is that they MIGHT reconsider the official implementation and change it accordingly in some future patch/expansion.

Nothing more , nothing less...


well to sum it up. ccp wanted to nerf the fact that you can do lvl5's in highsec. problem here: they were so lazy and just change few values that now lvl4 missionrunners also have the problem. means alot more lowsec level4 missions. mean that 0.5 sec status agents will die and eve have 5-6 big missionrunner hubs. i guess thats not they way ccp want it. so maybe put some effort in the code so only lvl5's are affected by the nerf!! Evil or Very Mad

Lone Provider
Posted - 2010.06.01 10:09:00 - [170]
 

Originally by: Vitamin B12
Originally by: 1OfMany
Edited by: 1OfMany on 01/06/2010 09:46:01
Edited by: 1OfMany on 01/06/2010 09:45:11
Originally by: Spins Meats
Edited by: Spins Meats on 01/06/2010 07:53:32
Originally by: 1OfMany
I still have not seen any hard proof that L5's where intended for low-sec only.

The only 'hard' evidence which had been shown in another thread is an almost 3 year old BLOG from a developer where the only statement made was that the AGENTS would be available in low-sec. So PLEASE, don't call lowered probability of L5's in Hi-sec an Exploit fix or fix as it was intended.


This post, perhaps?
Took me all of three minutes to find; I'm sure there are others, I just can't be bothered doing your homework for you.



OMG .... a CCP reply with the remark 'DONT COUNT ON IT TO LAST'..... i've seen it and i dont add value to it unless it's part of the original expansion or patch notes.

You must be into the category that believes every politicians promise of change...
Or that everything CCP has promised in the past years will still come true as well as all the minor frustrating bugs will be fixed in the next expansion..

My point still stands, that remark of the CCP Dropbear does not mean it is intended to be lowsec from the start if you wish to read it whatever way. The ONLY thing i conclude from this remark besides that it aint official is that they MIGHT reconsider the official implementation and change it accordingly in some future patch/expansion.

Nothing more , nothing less...


well to sum it up. ccp wanted to nerf the fact that you can do lvl5's in highsec. problem here: they were so lazy and just change few values that now lvl4 missionrunners also have the problem. means alot more lowsec level4 missions. mean that 0.5 sec status agents will die and eve have 5-6 big missionrunner hubs. i guess thats not they way ccp want it. so maybe put some effort in the code so only lvl5's are affected by the nerf!! Evil or Very Mad



NO! It has nothing to do with where lvl5s are at, The Nerf was to take pressure off systems and spread missions about into less crowded systems

The answer for CCP, USE SOME OF THE MONTHLY £MILLIONS YOU RAKE IN FROM THE SUBSCRIBERS AND UPGRADE YOUR SERVER

Derelicht
Posted - 2010.06.01 10:19:00 - [171]
 

Not sure if anyone mentioned it yet, but it's nice to see we're getting consecutive L3 missions in low sec now.

/me starts taking bets on when they will reverse (or partly reverse) this stroke of genius.

Spins Meats
Gallente
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2010.06.01 10:25:00 - [172]
 

Originally by: Derelicht
Not sure if anyone mentioned it yet, but it's nice to see we're getting consecutive L3 missions in low sec now.


Or possibly they want players to start doing SOMETHING, ANYTHING outside of highsec. You're deluding yourself if you think that most L3s can't trivially be done solo in a PvP fitted ship.

Originally by: Derelicht
/me starts taking bets on when they will reverse (or partly reverse) this stroke of genius.


It's (inherently self-limiting) attitudes like this which are the root of the problem.

Spins Meats
Gallente
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2010.06.01 10:31:00 - [173]
 

Originally by: 1OfMany

OMG .... a CCP reply with the remark 'DONT COUNT ON IT TO LAST'..... i've seen it and i dont add value to it unless it's part of the original expansion or patch notes.

You must be into the category that believes every politicians promise of change...
Or that everything CCP has promised in the past years will still come true as well as all the minor frustrating bugs will be fixed in the next expansion..



No, I'm 'into' the category that believes that a comment from an employee of a company about a thing is proof against "nobody from that company ever said anything about this thing."

Like it or hate it, CCP have expressed INTENT in the past, even if only in the form of this (and other) throwaway comments. Whether you and others expected them to actually follow through or not is thoroughly irrelevant.


Oddshrub
Minmatar
Rummets koldeste kys
Posted - 2010.06.01 10:38:00 - [174]
 

Originally by: Misanthra
Well if going to low sec to get the mission....running in low sec kind of a logical assumption you are gonna be there.

Maybe it is for you, but that's not how they actually work. Low sec agents will send you into high sec once in a while. Which is actually more dangerous than just doing the mission in low sec since you'll have to cross gates instead of just sitting aligned keeping an eye out for probes. :p

Noran Ferah
Red Sky Morning
Posted - 2010.06.01 12:20:00 - [175]
 

Well, missioning in lowsec is not that hard. Unprobeable tengu and/or legion gets it done. Who would have thought that piece of crap legion actually has a use?

I only do that for the LP though, because it is not available elsewhere in the amounts I want it for that particular corp.


WTS: 2 T2 purger fit rattlesnakes, has a shiny new skin, but not much use...


RedSplat
Posted - 2010.06.01 13:12:00 - [176]
 

Level 5's are Lowsec content.

If you cant, cant be bothered to or are too frightened of actual risk to go to Lowsec then i suggest you stick to level 4's in highsec or try playing a game that isn't EVE online.

Goose99
Posted - 2010.06.01 13:19:00 - [177]
 

Originally by: RedSplat
Level 5's are Lowsec content.

If you cant, cant be bothered to or are too frightened of actual risk to go to Lowsec then i suggest you stick to level 4's in highsec or try playing a game that isn't EVE online.


That contradicts reality. Some corps have dumped useless alts into lowsec, forcing l5 agents to spawn highsec lvl5s majority of the time. Not saying that it *shouldn't* be lowsec content(I think it should), just that it *isn't.*Rolling Eyes

Luthor Nakatomi
Posted - 2010.06.01 13:52:00 - [178]
 

Originally by: Spins Meats
Originally by: 1OfMany

OMG .... a CCP reply with the remark 'DONT COUNT ON IT TO LAST'..... i've seen it and i dont add value to it unless it's part of the original expansion or patch notes.

You must be into the category that believes every politicians promise of change...
Or that everything CCP has promised in the past years will still come true as well as all the minor frustrating bugs will be fixed in the next expansion..



No, I'm 'into' the category that believes that a comment from an employee of a company about a thing is proof against "nobody from that company ever said anything about this thing."

Like it or hate it, CCP have expressed INTENT in the past, even if only in the form of this (and other) throwaway comments. Whether you and others expected them to actually follow through or not is thoroughly irrelevant.




just reading this funny thread, so what you basicly say is that your interpretation of the same words is just because they show intent, while any other interpretation is irrelevant/not true as they believe many intents from CCP's part never come through?

I would think in a democratic way that both statements are as valid or irrelevant and the thruth will be somewhere in a timeline sheet on a CCP employees desk, or trashcan ...

I dont care what happens either way, W-space or 0.0 is much more fun.

Goose99
Posted - 2010.06.01 14:08:00 - [179]
 

Originally by: Luthor Nakatomi

I dont care what happens either way, W-space or 0.0 is much more fun.


WH is fun. Sov null is macro-ratting, plex farming on steroids. In some of those backwater systems you can go on for weeks without seeing a single hostile. You're more likely to get suicide ganked in highsec hub than killed out here. Although there is the obligatory lagfest once in a while, if that's your definition of fun.

Natalie Caladan
Posted - 2010.06.01 14:58:00 - [180]
 

Edited by: Natalie Caladan on 01/06/2010 15:02:38


Well if CCP wants people in lowsec they should try something different than sending missionrunners to it. The only effect is that people will all go to central highsec L4 hubs >5 jumps from lowsec, effectually putting MORE strain on local hubs, as you can read here. Thus having the reversed effect than intended.

And why do they want people in lowsec anyway?

The difficuly way (for CCP) would be making missions far more challenging and PvP like. Like fewer, smarter, stronger NPCs that need teams, cooperation and PvPesque techniques and builds to succeed.

Whether you agree with it or not, this CCP move clearly hasn't the intended result.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (14)

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