open All Channels
seplocked Missions & Complexes
blankseplocked why do high sec players get no mission love?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9

Author Topic

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.02.03 03:24:00 - [211]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 03/02/2011 03:26:34
Originally by: Patri Andari
Let's assume the argument is restricted to level 1-4 missions only.
Why should we assume that when it isn't. The entire argument is about L5s.
Quote:
Is there any way you can refute my observations about the EVE tradition without select quoting?
I only quote the first bits so you know what I respond to. There is absolutely zero need to include it all — you know what you said.

And yes, I can refute that observation by again pointing to L5s (and L6s and L7s, even though they were never implemented). The argument is about L5s and their introduction shattered your "tradition." It doesn't exist, if it ever did. Missions are meant to be just like all other PvE and L5s are the proof of this. Just because you say "let's ignore the proof that totally disproves my argument" doesn't mean that your argument holds any water.

L5s make missions conform to the tradition of all other PvE.

Even if your tradition existed, it was removed four years ago and holds zero relevance for how the game is balanced today. You're basically arguing that, "by tradition," we should still be balancing sov around station ping-pong; we should never consider incursions and w-space when discussing PvE because they are not traditional. Heating your modules is untraditional, and we should never take that into consideration for anything. BPO lottery is also traditional, so we should never consider invention when discussing T2.
Quote:
I accept that you think level 5 missions in high sec are a result of a bug ( I disagree)
…and that is why I can't take anything you say on the topic of mission seriously.
Quote:
Does this exist in any other PVE in EVE?
It doesn't even exist for missions, so, rather…
Quote:
Does this exist in any […] PVE in EVE?
No. Unless you count belt ratting, which doesn't exist at all at the highest sec levels…

Rena Wake
Posted - 2011.02.03 05:10:00 - [212]
 

Wow.....just wow. I gotta hand it to you Tippia, I see you on these forums alot....I just wonder how you can manage to keep reiterating factual information to people with just a strongly willful inability to listen/think. I mean these people just keep recycling their emotional arguments over and over again and ignore BASIC FACTUAL INFORMATION thinking they are making a semblance of a valid point.

Bottom line as to why "L5s in hi-sec" crowd are all WRONG.

CCP meant L5s from the start to be low-sec only content. You all fail/can't/won't be bothered to read. I can understand not being happy with available content, but say what you mean.

Don't fight on a stance just because you disagree with it on no rational basis and try to invent a world view where how you think things should be is reality, because it is not and makes you guys look like fools. And makes intelligent people who can follow logic waste precious brain cycles trying to show you the light.

I'm really enjoying the entertainment btw. Just because I can tell you guys dont understand the finer points of debate well enough, I'll let you know you are losing horribly to Tippia and "low sec L5 crew". Lolz. Keep on going Wink

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.02.03 06:01:00 - [213]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
Level 5 Missions are the only Mission PVE content where access to content is limited by system security. It should not be. It breaks tradition and is arbitrary.


What tradition is being broken?

Originally by: Patri Andari
Missions are treated differently. They restrict reward based on level, agent quality, and security level. They do not restrict content as do all other experiences in EVE. It is so not because I say so but as a matter of fact.


Certainly, the rewards from mission agents vary based on system security, agent level, character's Negotiation and "X Connections" levels.

Character skills are not a reason for level 5s to be accessible in hisec. Character skills also impact the efficiency of all modules fitted to a starship - this is not a reason to allow bombs to be used in hisec.

The yield of asteroid belts varies depending on the system security level - this is not a reason to have arkonor in hisec. So in another PvE environment where one type of a "thing" is only available in nullsec, the difference in reward between different security levels is not justification to move all the content to hisec, just with lower rewards.

Taking the issue of agent rewards differing based on security level on its own as an indicator that level 5 missions should be available in hisec is a classic case of putting the cart before the horse. Note that level 5 missions offer far more in terms of LP payouts than level 4 missions. They offer far better agent rewards overall, far more than the difference between a poor quality L4 agent in a 1.0 system and a high quality L4 agent in a 0.5.

Have a look at where most of the L4 Q20 agents are. Where are they? Lowsec and nullsec. So just the increase in quality from Q18 to Q20 is enough to push L4 agents out into lowsec, why would there be any L5 agents in hisec?

So based purely on the increased rewards as security is reduced, we have L4 Q20 agents exclusively in lowsec and nullsec. The difference in rewards between L4 and L5 agents alone is enough to justify L5 agents being unavailable in hisec. The rewards for L5 are higher than L4 Q20 in lowsec, therefore L5s of any quality should be in lowsec or nullsec.

Regardless of whether we take the argument as "reduced rewards in higher security and increased rewards as security is reduced" or "it is traditional to put more rewarding activities in lower security systems", L5 missions have no place being in hisec. If you reduced the rewards enough to warrant putting the agents in hisec, the missions would not be worth running.

Misanthra
Posted - 2011.02.03 07:16:00 - [214]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
Originally by: Patri Andari
Level 5 Missions are the only Mission PVE content where access to content is limited by system security. It should not be. It breaks tradition and is arbitrary.


What tradition is being broken?


None. As stated in the expansion that moved this...this was a bug fix.

Empire<Low Sec<0.0 the trend in eve for years, lv 5 was an oversight fixed. empire has level 4, low at about .3 gets some real good belt ratting and sites not farmed 23.5/7 like in empire. 0.0 has its fortunes to be made (or lost when you get sc drive by'd lol).


Want the challenge and rewards, want to see lower sec status. Blob really isn't that bad, pays well. YOu don't even have to love pvp...just tolerate it. LIke me some roams to be honest and did those voluntarily. Blob fest to pop a pos....ain't gonna lie hated it, did because it was a really shoudl be seen on these things kind of tning. POS op attendance say 2 nights a week keeps you in the 0.0 corp to hit the good pve those remaining 5 nights. Give a little, get alot back. Some can't dig that, their loss really.

Knew lots of 0.0 people, not a cta you had to drag them off the carebear path. Least they showed up when they had too lol...why they'd choose carebear over roams I'll never know.

Archbeholder
Posted - 2011.02.03 20:30:00 - [215]
 

Edited by: Archbeholder on 03/02/2011 20:29:52
Intended or not, removing level5 missions from hi sec is pretty much make content unaccessible for majority of players.

1. create content
2. make it unaccessible
3. ??????
4. PROFIT



5.wonder why wow got 12mil players

in b4 fanboys will expain to me how level 5 missions are totally accessible

Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
Posted - 2011.02.03 21:48:00 - [216]
 

Originally by: Archbeholder

2. make it unaccessible

in b4 fanboys will expain to me how level 5 missions are totally accessible



Well, you can access them. That means they are "accessible." Because words, they mean things.

laysha
Amarr
GONE RETARD BACK LATER
Posted - 2011.02.03 21:48:00 - [217]
 

Originally by: Archbeholder
Edited by: Archbeholder on 03/02/2011 20:29:52
Intended or not, removing level5 missions from hi sec is pretty much make content unaccessible for majority of players.




How are they unaccessible? explain


Jokus Balim
Minmatar
Capital Destruction
Imperial 0rder
Posted - 2011.02.03 21:51:00 - [218]
 

Edited by: Jokus Balim on 03/02/2011 21:59:50
Edited by: Jokus Balim on 03/02/2011 21:54:41
It's funny. We would see exactly the same rant again and again, if level 5 missions would be in highsec. You can reach peak performance in missions pretty fast. Solo level 4s after 3 months are no problem. Solo level 5s aren't a problem either, you just need some more skill learning, better stuff. But it's basically the same like level 4 missions. You fit one of the perfect (or next-to-perfect) fittings for the job with the right skills, know the triggers, tricks and treats etc. and they become the same non-issue that level 4 missions are now.

And it probably is a non-issue to balance mission rewards for level 5 missions in a way that they work in highsec. It shouldn't be too difficult to let the reward increase proportional to the needed time.

But would that help? I think it won't. Next steps: People demand level 6 missions. People will how to do them. People become bored. And then? Level 7 missions. And then? Level 8 missions.

A whole lot of MMOs do exactly that. They cater to the same occupation again and again. Some do it in a successful way (like WoW, Lineage, Everquest, Aion), others don't and die (every MMO of that type that is not WoW, Lineage, Everquest, Aion). But this is often coupled with a bigger-is-better agenda. You master one level and proceed to the next one. And in all these games you play some special class and can only choose between a small set of activities - like being a rogue who knifes nasty monsters or other players, farms gold in daily quests and sews the occasional leather clothing. Those many layers are necessary to keep the players around.

CCP arbitrarily set a stop mark with level 4 missions in highsec and level 5 missions in lowsec. No new tiers of missions, but also no tiered equipment that losses any usage, when you reach the next dungeon level. A Rifter in EVE is both a great rookie and a veteran pirate vessel. That makes the hierarchy of this type of "dungeon" lower. But EVE sets more interest in diversity than uniform game structure, often coupled with mainly player driven content.

And missions are actually improved. Look at the patch notes. More missions were added to the already existing tiers of missions, which follow the set rules: level 1-4 in highsec and below, level 5 in lowsec and below. But that was only some small polishing. The big addition were incursions. These truely follow a EVE tradition: add more content, which is not an additional layer of old content but a new feature that runs parallel all old activities. Add more diversity, but with shallow hierarchy (people already did the top-tier Sansha stuff, now they evolve a new play style with it).

In conclusion: there is no right or wrong for level 5 missions in highsec, cause it's an intentional design decision by the game creators. It's a rule. It's like "the bishop can move any number of squares diagonally". Personally I say it's the right decision for the stated reasons.

dorfsorc
Posted - 2011.02.03 23:26:00 - [219]
 

Originally by: Jokus Balim
Edited by: Jokus Balim on 03/02/2011 21:59:50
Edited by: Jokus Balim on 03/02/2011 21:54:41
It's funny. We would see exactly the same rant again and again, if level 5 missions would be in highsec. You can reach peak performance in missions pretty fast. Solo level 4s after 3 months are no problem. Solo level 5s aren't a problem either, you just need some more skill learning, better stuff. But it's basically the same like level 4 missions. You fit one of the perfect (or next-to-perfect) fittings for the job with the right skills, know the triggers, tricks and treats etc. and they become the same non-issue that level 4 missions are now.

And it probably is a non-issue to balance mission rewards for level 5 missions in a way that they work in highsec. It shouldn't be too difficult to let the reward increase proportional to the needed time.

But would that help? I think it won't. Next steps: People demand level 6 missions. People will how to do them. People become bored. And then? Level 7 missions. And then? Level 8 missions.

A whole lot of MMOs do exactly that. They cater to the same occupation again and again. Some do it in a successful way (like WoW, Lineage, Everquest, Aion), others don't and die (every MMO of that type that is not WoW, Lineage, Everquest, Aion). But this is often coupled with a bigger-is-better agenda. You master one level and proceed to the next one. And in all these games you play some special class and can only choose between a small set of activities - like being a rogue who knifes nasty monsters or other players, farms gold in daily quests and sews the occasional leather clothing. Those many layers are necessary to keep the players around.

CCP arbitrarily set a stop mark with level 4 missions in highsec and level 5 missions in lowsec. No new tiers of missions, but also no tiered equipment that losses any usage, when you reach the next dungeon level. A Rifter in EVE is both a great rookie and a veteran pirate vessel. That makes the hierarchy of this type of "dungeon" lower. But EVE sets more interest in diversity than uniform game structure, often coupled with mainly player driven content.

And missions are actually improved. Look at the patch notes. More missions were added to the already existing tiers of missions, which follow the set rules: level 1-4 in highsec and below, level 5 in lowsec and below. But that was only some small polishing. The big addition were incursions. These truely follow a EVE tradition: add more content, which is not an additional layer of old content but a new feature that runs parallel all old activities. Add more diversity, but with shallow hierarchy (people already did the top-tier Sansha stuff, now they evolve a new play style with it).

In conclusion: there is no right or wrong for level 5 missions in highsec, cause it's an intentional design decision by the game creators. It's a rule. It's like "the bishop can move any number of squares diagonally". Personally I say it's the right decision for the stated reasons.


excellent post. I have used the comparison mmo analogy myself having played most of them. At some point the dungeons become trivial because of changes in level cap and/or gear. The fact that EVE has no levels, only skills lends credence to the argument that ever increasing levels of missions are not necessary. It supports the idea that different content, not escalated content meets the greater need of the player base. My grousing about losing the fun of doing lvl 5's without having to deal with ganksters, weakens in this broader view. While incursion may not be the answer for solo and small fleet players, it does show that CCP serves its larger community and is giving the big, well trained corps more to do and bringing new players and friends along for the party.
the DORF

Spineker
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.04 07:35:00 - [220]
 

Originally by: GyokZoli
Originally by: Don Zektrade
ALL content should be accessible in either hi-sec or low/00. And should have incursion like reward curve..

* Imagine lvl5 in 0.5 giving 30% of LP reward vs lvl5 in 0.0
* Sanctum in 0.5 but with smaller bounties, and cut loot table (eg centus-b = max)
*etc

For instance:
1mil BS = 1mil in 0.0, 800k in 0.1-0.4, 600k in 0.5
1000lp = 1k in 0.0, 800 in 01-04, 600 in 0.5

It would definitely expand options for lots of players (carebears if you wish) and still keep risk vs reward factor. And more content never hurts, especially if its already done. And just needs modification...



I'm a cearbear but I don't think it's a good idea to bring level5s and Sanctums into hisec. We can already make a lot of money.
Although I agree on that we need more diversity.



Contridict yourself much?

GyokZoli
Caldari
Sanctum of Citizens
Posted - 2011.02.04 10:12:00 - [221]
 

Originally by: Spineker
Originally by: GyokZoli

I'm a cearbear but I don't think it's a good idea to bring level5s and Sanctums into hisec. We can already make a lot of money.
Although I agree on that we need more diversity.



Contridict yourself much?

No. I meant we don't need anything with better ISK/hour ratio than level4 missions since we can already make a crapload of money. But we do need something different.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.02.04 10:34:00 - [222]
 

Originally by: Spineker
Contridict yourself much?


Words. They mean stuff. "Diversity" doesn't mean "level 5 missions in hisec." It means "a greater variety of activities." At the simple level, it might mean different level 4 missions (such as interceptor missions, scouting missions, exploration missions).

At the greater level, it might simply mean hisec carebears get encouraged to participate in other hisec activities apart from mission running.

Ana Vyr
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.04 16:36:00 - [223]
 

Tippia, don't you ever get tired of arguing about this crap with people? You must enjoy the mental exercise or something?

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2011.02.04 17:57:00 - [224]
 

Originally by: Tippia

L5s make missions conform to the tradition of all other PvE.


Translation: Prior to level 5 missions, missions were nothing like all other PvE. Thank you for that admission of an obvious fact.

Originally by: Tippia

Even if your tradition existed, it was removed four years ago and holds zero relevance for how the game is balanced today.



Four years ago? ...Really?..Please enlighten me.

Like it or not it did exist. You yourself acknowledged that above in your "round about admit but deny" fashion.

I have come into this debate to make one major, and as yet un-rebutted, point. Level 5 missions and their exclusion to low sec is a break in an otherwise well established and working tradition with respect to missions.

They have always been allowed in all security and with all content available. They have only ever been controlled with respect to payout based on level, agent quality and security of system. This has always made them different than all other PVE content. I respectfully disagree that there was any need to change this despite the fact that it has been changed. The are established ways to control payout and restricting missions content is this manner was a mistake imho.








XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
Posted - 2011.02.04 18:11:00 - [225]
 

Edited by: XXSketchxx on 04/02/2011 18:11:07
Originally by: Patri Andari
snip


Really like repeating yourself don't you?

The tradition you seek was an illusion created by a bug.

Missions are not special, and should conform to the same content restrictions as all other PVE activities.

Cambarus
Malicious Destruction
War Against the Manifest
Posted - 2011.02.04 18:46:00 - [226]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
Originally by: Tippia

L5s make missions conform to the tradition of all other PvE.


Translation: Prior to level 5 missions, missions were nothing like all other PvE. Thank you for that admission of an obvious fact.


Actually prior to level 5 missions there were still pirate faction missions, which are somewhat harder than lvl 4s and have MUCH better rewards. Also, the very idea that you're trying to argue is absurd. On one hand you're claiming that missions did not conform to the standards held by other pve types, while at the same time arguing that they should be kept in highsec because of "tradition". Traditionally there are things relating to pve available in low/nullsec that are NOT available in highsec, what makes the tradition YOU like better than the tradition applied to the rest of the game?
Originally by: Patri Andari

Like it or not it did exist. You yourself acknowledged that above in your "round about admit but deny" fashion.

I have come into this debate to make one major, and as yet un-rebutted, point. Level 5 missions and their exclusion to low sec is a break in an otherwise well established and working tradition with respect to missions.
OK, here's your rebuttal:
1)Highsec level 5s are a huge nerf to lowsec level 5s, an already woefully unbalanced system type.
2)A tradition with regards to missions perhaps but not with regards to the rest of the game. Balance is not achieved by looking only at one part of the game, there is more at work here than that. To give a comparable argument to what you said:
'Level 5 missions and their inclusion in high sec is a break in an otherwise well established and working tradition with respect to pve.'


Originally by: Patri Andari

They have always been allowed in all security and with all content available. They have only ever been controlled with respect to payout based on level, agent quality and security of system. This has always made them different than all other PVE content. I respectfully disagree that there was any need to change this despite the fact that it has been changed. The are established ways to control payout and restricting missions content is this manner was a mistake imho.

Actually we've had pirate faction missions in nullsec for as long as I can remember. And entire branch of missions not available in highsec. Missions were never different than other forms of PVE in that respect, so that entire part of your argument is invalid. And even were it not, having an imbalance that has been there for ages is no reason not to fix it.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.02.04 20:28:00 - [227]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
Four years ago? ...Really?..Please enlighten me.
Four years ago, L5s were introduced. Before that, there were nullsec-only missions.
Quote:
I have come into this debate to make one major, and as yet un-rebutted, point. Level 5 missions and their exclusion to low sec is a break in an otherwise well established and working tradition with respect to missions.
Rather: L5s is just another case of missions conforming to the tradition of PvE. In fact, if you want to argue against this, you should probably go after the fact that they never gave us those L6 and L7 missions that would have completed the set and made this conformity abundantly clear.
Quote:
They have always been allowed in all security and with all content available.
False, as Cambarus points out.
Quote:
They have only ever been controlled with respect to payout based on level, agent quality and security of system.
Incorrect, and L5s changed that anyway four years ago. In fact, this "tradition" of yours, even if it did exist (which, as mentioned, it didn't) existed for a shorter amount of time than it has not existed since. You're basically arguing that it's my tradition to come over to you in a longboat, pillage your stone hut, steal your women (to use a nice euphemism) and mount your head on a pike because I don't like the cut of your jib…

…but of course, since that went out of style 1000 years ago, that's not really a "tradition" any more. They fixed that unfortunate behaviour. Nowadays, the actual tradition — the only one we need to care about — is to call you silly on an internet forum, and going back to this outdated way of doing things would be a step back.
Quote:
I respectfully disagree that there was any need to change this despite the fact that it has been changed.
What change? They fixed a bug, that is all. You don't want bugs to be fixed, is that it?
Quote:
The are established ways to control payout and restricting missions content is this manner was a mistake imho.
Yes, and applying those to L5s so that they fit what you're mean to get in highsec would mean they'd just be another set of L4s. Which leads us back to the questions you have yet to answer: what content is it you feel you're missing out on by not having L5s in highsec? What is it you're after? Why do you need L5s, specifically?

Asp IV
Amarr
Posted - 2011.02.04 20:39:00 - [228]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Patri Andari
Four years ago? ...Really?..Please enlighten me.
Four years ago, L5s were introduced. Before that, there were nullsec-only missions.
Quote:
I have come into this debate to make one major, and as yet un-rebutted, point. Level 5 missions and their exclusion to low sec is a break in an otherwise well established and working tradition with respect to missions.
Rather: L5s is just another case of missions conforming to the tradition of PvE. In fact, if you want to argue against this, you should probably go after the fact that they never gave us those L6 and L7 missions that would have completed the set and made this conformity abundantly clear.
Quote:
They have always been allowed in all security and with all content available.
False, as Cambarus points out.
Quote:
They have only ever been controlled with respect to payout based on level, agent quality and security of system.
Incorrect, and L5s changed that anyway four years ago. In fact, this "tradition" of yours, even if it did exist (which, as mentioned, it didn't) existed for a shorter amount of time than it has not existed since. You're basically arguing that it's my tradition to come over to you in a longboat, pillage your stone hut, steal your women (to use a nice analogy) and mount your head on a pike because I don't like the cut of your jib…

…but of course, since that went out of style 1000 years ago, that's not really a "tradition" any more. They fixed that unfortunate behaviour. Nowadays, the actual tradition — the only one we need to care about — is to call you silly on an internet forum, and going back to this outdated way of doing things would be a step back.
Quote:
I respectfully disagree that there was any need to change this despite the fact that it has been changed.
What change? They fixed a bug, that is all. You don't want bugs to be fixed, is that it?
Quote:
The are established ways to control payout and restricting missions content is this manner was a mistake imho.
Yes, and applying those to L5s so that they fit what you're mean to get in highsec would mean they'd just be another set of L4s. Which leads us back to the questions you have yet to answer: what content is it you feel you're missing out on by not having L5s in highsec? What is it you're after? Why do you need L5s, specifically?



fixed.

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2011.02.04 21:51:00 - [229]
 

Edited by: Patri Andari on 04/02/2011 22:25:57
Originally by: Cambarus
Originally by: Patri Andari
Translation: Prior to level 5 missions, missions were nothing like all other PvE. Thank you for that admission of an obvious fact.



Actually prior to level 5 missions there were still pirate faction missions, which are somewhat harder than lvl 4s and have MUCH better rewards.


I was sure someone would make this false argument sooner or later.

Pirate missions were available in high sec. Thukker Tribe offered them in all their glory in....wait for it...High security space.

Every thing from Police Invasion (opposite of Pirate Invasion) to Blockade vs. Concord rats. I know this because I ran those missions almost exclusively when Nomad implants were first introduced into the game.

Thukker no longer offers the missions but not because of some change in offering those missions in high security. It was because CCP changed Thukker's standings vs. Minmatar.

Originally by: Cambarus
Originally by: Patri Andari

I have come into this debate to make one major, and as yet un-rebutted, point. Level 5 missions and their exclusion to low sec is a break in an otherwise well established and working tradition with respect to missions.


OK, here's your rebuttal:
1)Highsec level 5s are a huge nerf to lowsec level 5s, an already woefully unbalanced system type.


Please explain how allowing high security level (1-4) is some how not a nerf to low security (1-4) missions, yet allowing high security level 5 missions is nerf to low security missions. Because at first glance this seems to lack consistency. All missions are balanced across those security levels due to varied payouts associated with increased risks

Originally by: Cambarus
Actually we've had pirate faction missions in nullsec for as long as I can remember. And entire branch of missions not available in highsec.


WRONG! As stated above, that mission content was fully available in high security. Do not take my word for it. Ask anyone who has run missions for Thukker prior to their standings change.

So much for the rebuttal


Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.02.04 22:29:00 - [230]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari
All missions are balanced across those security levels due to varied payouts associated with increased risks
That's just it: they're not.

Mikaleon
Caldari
Laurentian Abyss
Posted - 2011.02.04 22:31:00 - [231]
 

Sorry, did not want to read 8 pages worth of wall of texts, but I do have something constructive to propose.

Why not join a corp that specializes in level 5 access? You can get a feeling for them in low sec, and then when you think you are ready, leave for your own spot and do your thing. (Hopefully in a nice quiet spot).

Mikaleon

Rina Maas
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.04 22:39:00 - [232]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari


I was sure someone would make this false argument sooner or later.

Pirate missions were available in high sec. Thukker Tribe offered them in all their glory in....wait for it...High security space.

Every thing from Police Invasion (opposite of Pirate Invasion) to Blockade vs. Concord rats. I know this because I ran those missions almost exclusively when Nomad implants were first introduced into the game.

Thukker no longer offers the missions but not because of some change in offering those missions in high security. It was because CCP changed Thukker's standings vs. Minmatar.




Sorry to burst your bubble - Thukker is not and never has been a pirate faction.

The pirate factions have nice shiny ships. Thukker is like Sisters or Syndicate.

Try sticking to facts rather than your made up truth.


If you want extra difficulty and/or isk move your fat lazy backsides into low and nul sec. You may even like it - shock/horror - may be make some friends!

The only people who think there should be a debate are those who took advantage of a bug that took a while to be fixed. Level 5s were NEVER intended for hi sec. EVER. THE END.


dorfsorc
Posted - 2011.02.04 23:17:00 - [233]
 





The only people who think there should be a debate are those who took advantage of a bug that took a while to be fixed. Level 5s were NEVER intended for hi sec. EVER. THE END.




the end , only because the lvl 5's were taken away. bug,or not, people joined the game long after they were a part of the game. To those players, it is still content removed. If the dev intent was for them to only be low sec missions then clearly the mission assignment code was borked and should have been changed long ago. If the reward was the problem, perhaps more dev time to resolve that, but still not years. I still hold to my premise that if high sec agents can offer missions in any adjacent space, then low sec agents should do the same. If NOT, then stop letting high sec agents offer missions in low sec space, seeems like that would be the same bug as the one they fixed.

In any event, it is clear that many players that have been here a while are bothered by those lvl 5 missions being in high sec and it always comes down to either risk/reward or CCP original intent. Others have said how easy they are. Okay, if they are easy, keep them, label them lvl 4, change the reward and add content back to high sec missioners at almost no dev time cost.

someone also said new missions were added. please name some , havent found them yet, nor have any of my corpmates. perhaps they arent in our space or with any of the npc corps we have faction with. Toss us a bone here, please.

the Dorf

Patri Andari
Caldari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
Posted - 2011.02.04 23:32:00 - [234]
 

Originally by: Rina Maas
Originally by: Patri Andari


I was sure someone would make this false argument sooner or later.

Pirate missions were available in high sec. Thukker Tribe offered them in all their glory in....wait for it...High security space.

Every thing from Police Invasion (opposite of Pirate Invasion) to Blockade vs. Concord rats. I know this because I ran those missions almost exclusively when Nomad implants were first introduced into the game.

Thukker no longer offers the missions but not because of some change in offering those missions in high security. It was because CCP changed Thukker's standings vs. Minmatar.




Sorry to burst your bubble - Thukker is not and never has been a pirate faction.

The pirate factions have nice shiny ships. Thukker is like Sisters or Syndicate.

Try sticking to facts rather than your made up truth.


If you want extra difficulty and/or isk move your fat lazy backsides into low and nul sec. You may even like it - shock/horror - may be make some friends!

The only people who think there should be a debate are those who took advantage of a bug that took a while to be fixed. Level 5s were NEVER intended for hi sec. EVER. THE END.




Oh,hai. I did't see you there. Now come lay on the blanket and take your nap with the rest of the class. We will be doing finger painting after recess.



Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.02.05 00:19:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: dorfsorc
I still hold to my premise that if high sec agents can offer missions in any adjacent space, then low sec agents should do the same.
Guess what: they do. As long as those missions don't have any additional placement constraints.
Quote:
someone also said new missions were added. please name some , havent found them yet, nor have any of my corpmates. perhaps they arent in our space or with any of the npc corps we have faction with. Toss us a bone here, please.
Incursion 1.1 added 40 of them.
Here are a couple that people have encountered so far.

Cambarus
Malicious Destruction
War Against the Manifest
Posted - 2011.02.05 00:27:00 - [236]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari

Originally by: Cambarus



I was sure someone would make this false argument sooner or later.

Pirate missions were available in high sec. Thukker Tribe offered them in all their glory in....wait for it...High security space.


TBH I wouldn't consider thukker to be proper pirates, but fair enough if they gave pirate missions.
Originally by: Patri Andari

Please explain how allowing high security level (1-4) is some how not a nerf to low security (1-4) missions, yet allowing high security level 5 missions is nerf to low security missions. Because at first glance this seems to lack consistency. All missions are balanced across those security levels due to varied payouts associated with increased risks


Because lvl 1s to lvl 4s are not the top tier of missions, and the payout is more isk than LP. Lvl 5s are a huge LP faucet, and the more easily they can be accessed, the more LP floating around, and the less each LP is worth. And the difference between high and lowsec lvl 4s are so slim I can't see any reason to run them, because they are NOT balanced, and adding highsec lvl 5s would give them the same problem.

Originally by: Patri Andari

So much for the rebuttal

The only thing you got right was the pirate missions, this does not change the fact that being balanced with regards to other missions and being balanced with regards to pve as a whole are not the same thing.

Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
Posted - 2011.02.05 00:51:00 - [237]
 

Originally by: Patri Andari


Oh,hai. I did't see you there. Now come lay on the blanket and take your nap with the rest of the class. We will be doing finger painting after recess.





I don't even understand what you are arguing for. I see you are passionate that level 5's should be in highsec, but it's pretty clear CCP fundamentally disagree with you, isn't it? Where is the potential to argue? Either you pay the subscription, or you don't.

Spineker
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.05 09:05:00 - [238]
 

I think most of you play Eve Forums more than the game. The **** I read on here is stupid to be kind. All these blocks of text trying to sound all important and intelligent when most people don't even read it just go past it. Oh another quotetard fest....

L5's if for any reason should not be in Highsec because of economics that can be argued all the other reason taking away fun from paying customers with all this block quote horse **** is just that a big pile of ****.

Spineker
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.05 09:10:00 - [239]
 

Mikaleon,

Absolutely at least you didn't try to be all "Hey look at my quote wall of text bull**** aren't I smart"

No at least you made sense and worth reading.

Problem I have is people trying to stop others from having fun because they pretend to know everything. Or like like to cry CAREBEARS SUCK I dont disagree with what you are saying by the way. Just get tired of the tardfest in every thread.

colay Starwolf
Gallente
Indicium Technologies
Hephaestus Forge Alliance
Posted - 2011.02.05 12:57:00 - [240]
 

a buffer to learn how to do pve in fleets would not hurt for highsec. l4 to new PvE there is kind of a gap there perhaps moded level 5s not as much reward more to learn to play in a fleet


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9

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