These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Moving All Level 4 Agents to Low-Sec

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#121 - 2013-04-12 22:05:50 UTC
Nifter Telfo wrote:
If anything, they should move level 5s to high sec as well. We have high sec incursions which gives buckets of ISK, so why not Level 5s? Could give some very nice 3-5 man group content.


... and Sanctums and Havens.... c'mon folks... let's get this "Herpaderp Friday" rocking off the rails... Roll

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Praetor Meles
Black Mount Industrial
Breakpoint.
#122 - 2013-04-12 22:07:35 UTC
Posting in stealth "change nothing" thread.

[insert random rubbish that irritates you personally] is further evidence that Eve is dying/thriving*

  • delete as required to make your point
Tamiya Sarossa
Resistance is Character Forming
#123 - 2013-04-12 22:53:33 UTC
I think moving all LvL IV agents to lowsec is probably a bad move for a variety of reasons, but as someone who actually does run lowsec LvL IV's more than once in a blue moon, I'd really appreciate more agents throughout lowsec. Many corporations have all their lowsec agents in one hub, which is a pita if you're not planning on living out of that hub. Lowsec as it is is fairly scarce on resources except for exploration - more Lvl IV agents would help it to support a higher population.

Either create more lowsec Lvl IV agents, or move some of the less used ones from highsec.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#124 - 2013-04-12 23:16:19 UTC
kes88 wrote:
Tara Read wrote:

1. Isk generated in Low Sec is far less than just running a level 4 in High Sec in relative safety compared to Low.

2. Null sec offers much greater reward and the safety of a Coalition.

3. Low Sec is comprised mainly of Pirates, Faction Warfare, etc so to a pve player they want no reason to deal with these potential threats.

4. Any affront to pve players which inadvertently puts them at risk to such elements of gameplay is decried as unfair and unjust therefore nothing changes.

So really the stubbornness of these players creates the conundrum of what you have today in which vast Coalitions blue each others for relative safety and isk printing and those who really are introverted and want just a pve game just stay in High Sec. I personally wouldn't have any issue except that the quality of this game suffers due to the stubbornness of those who refuse to accept risk.

You cannot force risk upon these players because you will get the same tired bitchy responses day in and day out. Just like how I'm called every name in the book for suicide ganking some afk miner's Hulk and I'm thought of as the Devil because this person wants nothing to do with the risk mechanic and only wants to AFK mine.

Sadly the only way Low Sec will change is if CCP puts something back into the region that drives people enough to go there. make Anom's profitable as well as the nerfed Drone Sites. Give Low Sec a certain mineral that can only be mined there that is part of T2 production or something.

it forces players to go into these regions for the reward. They weigh the risk and see the reward is greater. Without any reward there is no creation of risk, combat, population etc. These are just some simple steps that need to be taken.

Will they? I've been around since 2004 and I can tell you I'm not holding my breath anytime soon especially with no one in the current CSM directly supporting our gameplay.


I do want to respond to a couple of things you've said here and some other points in this thread:

Firstly, you refer to the 'stubborness of those who refuse to accept risk' - I have two things I want to say about this:

1) Why on earth would someone, in their nice shiny BS want to jump into low and try and mish whilst avoiding being popped when they can have their cake and eat it in high sec. Yes, certainly risk averse, but sensible surely? If you fancy a pint of beer, you're probably gonna go down to your local where you can have a nice quiet pint, than the dodgy end of town pub where you are likely to get beaten up/mugged just so you can have your pint? No L4 missioners wants to deliberately turn themselves into a sitting duck when they are in a pve fit BS.

2) Stubborness is irrelevant. Low sec dwellers are just as stubborn about the fact that they want more targets. Criticising someone for being risk averse in this case is silly, because they don't care that they are being risk averse.

Secondly, I think that although the OP has good intentions - ie by considering the influx of isk brought by missioning but I feel that a lot of the pro-low sec posters in here simply want to have more easy targets. You aren't demanding that more people go to low sec and pvp, you are demanding that more people go to low sec and present themselves as easy targets (I say easy targets because someone missioning is at a disadvantage being in a pve fit)

Thirdly, on a slightly different note, something I always note in these sorts of posts is that people who profess to be suicide gankers or pvpers nearly always argue that they are ganking someone who is afk, presumably to justify the kill. I find it hard to believe that all these people being ganked are all horrid nasty afk players.

Fourthly, has it ever occured to anyone that not all high sec missioners want to stay in high sec all the time? I personally want to mission in hi, but I don't mind going into low/null for other reasons. I simply don't want to waste isk replacing ships that I don't need to lose, because I can mish in high without having to risk getting popped in something expensive.



I'll respond based upon your points.

On the first point. You are only reinforcing my statements as far as missioning and risk. Why would a mission runner venture to low sec at all? And it certainly is sensible if not down right lazy imo. We make things too easy for players in a "risky" universe. I'm not even saying these people should be in low sec.

I'm merely pointing out that they go unabated in their ventures and low sec gives them no incentive to go there.

On the second point you could not be more wrong. I don't really enjoy easy ganks. Sure they are meh kills and sometimes funny but I'd MUCH rather have a decent fight as I'm sure many a low sec dweller here would agree with me. That's why we are even IN low sec to begin with.

Many decent fights are to be had especially in FW space and I've been very open in wishing CCP would encourage these pve players to dabble in pvp or like I stated making Piracy a viable starting profession for newer players.

On the third point I can attest that 9 times out of 10 the people I gank i HS are either afk or semi afk which is why they are so easy to kill in the first place. Like I stated earlier if these pilots were self aware and had basic knowledge to watch local, D scan, etc it would be almost impossible to catch them.

On the fourth point you sound like you want your cake and want to eat it too. Eve shouldn't be WoW or Pve/Pvp sanctioned zones. Eve is supposed to be dangerous no matter where you are. Just because you want to avoid that element doesn't mean it should be so.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#125 - 2013-04-12 23:18:15 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
Caldari Citizen 20120308 wrote:
While we're at it just delete high sec entirely. That should solve YOUR needs and desires................. wrong. If that does happen the unsubscribe button isn't too hard to find.





Then unsubscribe. It's not like you contribute something to this game anyways except 15 dollars a month to collect rocks or shoot crosses.... The only reason why CCP refuses to act on this issue is merely subscriptions.


You pays your money, you makes your choice.

It amuses me how some tough-guy, Eve is a sandbox players, want to tell other folk how they should play.

CCP provide the sandbox, the players decide how to use it.


You sound upset. Where did the mean Pirate touch you? On your pod? Again I'd have no qualms with you being a reclusive hermit shooting rocks all day if it wasn't a detriment to what Eve should be, Utter chaos and danger. Sorry if this isn't a "pve" server for your cross shooting.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#126 - 2013-04-12 23:19:55 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
.... The only reason why CCP refuses to act on this issue is merely subscriptions.
Lol Those damn CCP people. Worried about their jobs and feeding their families. What is wrong with them!



Oh please.... Stop making this about CCP and more about you people threatening to quit because you don't want risk in a game that is built around it.
Mire Stoude
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#127 - 2013-04-12 23:19:56 UTC
Anytime I want to run missions in low sec for amazing returns I just jump in my cloaky stabbed atron and circle a complex for 10-20 minutes at a time.
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#128 - 2013-04-12 23:20:09 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
You are a fool to think anyone farming level 4 missions would all of the sudden decide to go to low sec to keep farming them. The only thing they would do is start farming level 3 missions.

Or leave.

Bravo, you killed EvE.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#129 - 2013-04-12 23:23:22 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
Caldari Citizen 20120308 wrote:
While we're at it just delete high sec entirely. That should solve YOUR needs and desires................. wrong. If that does happen the unsubscribe button isn't too hard to find.





Then unsubscribe. It's not like you contribute something to this game anyways except 15 dollars a month to collect rocks or shoot crosses.... The only reason why CCP refuses to act on this issue is merely subscriptions.

And so what if they pay 15 dollars to "collect rocks and shoot crosses"? People aren't playing this game to please you. Thy're not paying $15 to play how you want them to play and do what you want them to do.



I never said they did. However these people ***** and moan when they are killed because they expect their precious CONCORD to protect them. It's like guards in Stormwind only in space (see how I made that easier for you to relate to?)

The point is these people have become too comfortable. And judging from the outcries in this thread any sort of risk or danger is seen as an affront to your precious afk game play. Why don't you learn the mechanics? Why don't you outsmart gankers? it's not hard to do.

All it is is laziness in my eyes.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#130 - 2013-04-12 23:47:58 UTC  |  Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Tara Read wrote:
I never said they did. However these people ***** and moan when they are killed because they expect their precious CONCORD to protect them. It's like guards in Stormwind only in space (see how I made that easier for you to relate to?)

The point is these people have become too comfortable. And judging from the outcries in this thread any sort of risk or danger is seen as an affront to your precious afk game play. Why don't you learn the mechanics? Why don't you outsmart gankers? it's not hard to do.

All it is is laziness in my eyes.

You know what? I see more anti-carebears ***** and whine than I see carebears do it. And in case we forget, the outcry on this very thread, if you haven't noticed, is to have the game mechanics changed in favor of the ganker over the mission runner. And there are a couple of other whine threads on the very first page of GD asking for game mechanics to be changed to suit gankers over carebears.

This notion that "carebears" are whiners while deliberately ignoring the fact that gankers tend to be just as whiny (or worse) seriously needs to stop. I would suggest you follow your own advice and stop asking CCP to change the game mechanics to suit you and find ways to lure and gank your soft targets.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#131 - 2013-04-12 23:53:13 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
I never said they did. However these people ***** and moan when they are killed because they expect their precious CONCORD to protect them. It's like guards in Stormwind only in space (see how I made that easier for you to relate to?)

The point is these people have become too comfortable. And judging from the outcries in this thread any sort of risk or danger is seen as an affront to your precious afk game play. Why don't you learn the mechanics? Why don't you outsmart gankers? it's not hard to do.

All it is is laziness in my eyes.

You know what? I see more anti-carebears ***** and whine than I see carebears do it. And in case we forget, the outcry on this very thread, if you haven't noticed, is to have the game mechanics changed in favor of the ganker over the mission runner. And there are a couple of other whine threads on the very first page of GD asking for game mechanics to be changed to suit gankers over carebears.

This notion that "carebears" are whiners while deliberately ignoring the fact that gankers tend to be just as whiny (or worse) seriously needs to stop. I would suggest you follow your own advice and stop asking CCP to change the game mechanics to suit you and find ways to lure and gank your soft targets.



What are you smoking? I never suggested mechanics be changed to favor gankers so DON'T make asshat comments without first reading and digesting the information given to you. I suggested changing pve content in low sec to favor more traffic and a reason to bring people back to these regions besides pvp.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#132 - 2013-04-12 23:58:34 UTC
Nifter Telfo wrote:
If anything, they should move level 5s to high sec as well. We have high sec incursions which gives buckets of ISK, so why not Level 5s? Could give some very nice 3-5 man group content.

Now here's something.

MOVE ALL INCURSIONS TO LOW-SEC !!!

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Fairren
HellrisCorp
#133 - 2013-04-13 00:02:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Fairren
Mei Sui wrote:


1. “Pfft, they’ll just move to level 3’s”: And they are more than welcome to do so. But consider the Isk source coming from missions. They essentially come from 3 areas: Bounties/Tags, Mission Reward itself and Salvage.



The LP rewards are a big part of the income, too.

The LP store, salvage, and loot income is supply/demand driven. You can't treat it the same as static income from bounties and rewards and expect to nerf high sec missions effectively.
Mei Sui
Hades Covenant
#134 - 2013-04-13 01:19:51 UTC
Fairren wrote:
Mei Sui wrote:


1. “Pfft, they’ll just move to level 3’s”: And they are more than welcome to do so. But consider the Isk source coming from missions. They essentially come from 3 areas: Bounties/Tags, Mission Reward itself and Salvage.



The LP rewards are a big part of the income, too.

The LP store, salvage, and loot income is supply/demand driven. You can't treat it the same as static income from bounties and rewards and expect to nerf high sec missions effectively.


That is true, for the mission runner the LP store is a major source of isk. In Inflation terms however, it is not a net increase into the money supply. LP functions the same way as the mineral market, where it facilitates the transfer of ISK between parties, but does not add ISK directly into the money supply.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#135 - 2013-04-13 01:42:53 UTC
Tara Read wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
I never said they did. However these people ***** and moan when they are killed because they expect their precious CONCORD to protect them. It's like guards in Stormwind only in space (see how I made that easier for you to relate to?)

The point is these people have become too comfortable. And judging from the outcries in this thread any sort of risk or danger is seen as an affront to your precious afk game play. Why don't you learn the mechanics? Why don't you outsmart gankers? it's not hard to do.

All it is is laziness in my eyes.

You know what? I see more anti-carebears ***** and whine than I see carebears do it. And in case we forget, the outcry on this very thread, if you haven't noticed, is to have the game mechanics changed in favor of the ganker over the mission runner. And there are a couple of other whine threads on the very first page of GD asking for game mechanics to be changed to suit gankers over carebears.

This notion that "carebears" are whiners while deliberately ignoring the fact that gankers tend to be just as whiny (or worse) seriously needs to stop. I would suggest you follow your own advice and stop asking CCP to change the game mechanics to suit you and find ways to lure and gank your soft targets.



What are you smoking? I never suggested mechanics be changed to favor gankers so DON'T make asshat comments without first reading and digesting the information given to you. I suggested changing pve content in low sec to favor more traffic and a reason to bring people back to these regions besides pvp.


See bold above. You tell me to "go learn the game mechanics" (insinuating I don't already) and I tell you to stop bitching and whining and go play the game. Again, follow your own advice.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Mei Sui
Hades Covenant
#136 - 2013-04-13 01:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Mei Sui
A lot of people are reacting as if I'm suggesting that Level 4 agents be removed all together. If you want to farm level 4 missions all day long, you have my blessing. It's just the security status of the system will be a little more red than you may be used to, OR like it to be.

One poster said that EVE needs to provide a 'good and secure' source of income. It will continue to provide a secure source of income, via level 3 agents and below. There's nothing that says it has to be a 'good' source of income. If you want to live with no risk and mission away, your friendly level 3 agent will be glad to help. A few million per hour via level 3 missions is a decent source of income, if you want more, you should risk more.

Finally, a lot of mission runners are stating they have no effect in the EVE world. As was pointed out in the economics lecture during the 2012 Fanfest, that is patently wrong. Hi-Sec missions are an ENORMOUS source of ISK being dumped into the economy. This is causing a rising inflation rate that is hard to contain. The CCP presenter (Dr. Guymundsson, CCP EyoG) mentioned that one way CCP is looking at containing this enormous source of ISK has been increasing the ISK sinks via fee's and taxes. I believe this solution will go a long way in address a lot of issues without resorting to singular band aid solutions.
Cazador 64
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#137 - 2013-04-13 02:03:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Cazador 64
I have read this post before I am sure of it.
I am also sure this will never happen.
They have lvl 5s in low sec you point is null and void.

Edit: This Post is new and original and going places
Cazador 64
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#138 - 2013-04-13 02:10:32 UTC
Nexus Day wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
You are a fool to think anyone farming level 4 missions would all of the sudden decide to go to low sec to keep farming them. The only thing they would do is start farming level 3 missions.

Or leave.

Bravo, you killed EvE.


This, I love when people make these post like EVE is some new MMO that's fresh on the market.
The amount of unsubs would be unfathomable CCP knows this that's why lvl 4's will never be moved to low just so you can have more targets.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#139 - 2013-04-13 02:14:23 UTC
I don't know what all the hub-bub is about.

You can make more isk in Faction Warfare than you can running level 4's.

And all you need is a frig with warp stabs and saint's patience to watch local while you run down the 20 minute timers.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#140 - 2013-04-13 12:49:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Mei Sui wrote:
A lot of people are reacting as if I'm suggesting that Level 4 agents be removed all together. If you want to farm level 4 missions all day long, you have my blessing. It's just the security status of the system will be a little more red than you may be used to, OR like it to be.

One poster said that EVE needs to provide a 'good and secure' source of income. It will continue to provide a secure source of income, via level 3 agents and below. There's nothing that says it has to be a 'good' source of income. If you want to live with no risk and mission away, your friendly level 3 agent will be glad to help. A few million per hour via level 3 missions is a decent source of income, if you want more, you should risk more.

Finally, a lot of mission runners are stating they have no effect in the EVE world. As was pointed out in the economics lecture during the 2012 Fanfest, that is patently wrong. Hi-Sec missions are an ENORMOUS source of ISK being dumped into the economy. This is causing a rising inflation rate that is hard to contain. The CCP presenter (Dr. Guymundsson, CCP EyoG) mentioned that one way CCP is looking at containing this enormous source of ISK has been increasing the ISK sinks via fee's and taxes. I believe this solution will go a long way in address a lot of issues without resorting to singular band aid solutions.


Well, obviously, less players certainly add less ISK to the game. I guess that EVE was a cooler place when it had 100,000 subscribers. Lol

Anyway, I see you're stubborn enough to pretend to tell others how to play the game... which means that you may be quite bad at playing it your way. I completely fail to see how Llvl4 running harms you in whatever you do, unless you pretend that someone agrees to pad your KB with dedicated Lvl4 fits.