These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Missions arcs that tie into low and null - sponsorship

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2013-05-27 14:41:02 UTC
How about tying in some of the mission arcs or creating new ones that will cause some sort of high / null reliance. Lets say a new player is running a mission in high in which hes required to team up with a player in null whose is running a related mission but higher level arc.

For simplicity sake the NPC sends an important mission notice to both players with the other players name. They can mail each other and agree to do mission together. The player in highsec gets a bookmark to a mission generated titan bridge or whatever which only works for player. It sends him to mission system in null. Another one sends him back afterwards. They do whatever it is they have to do. Collect a tag each and take it back. As soon as both complete mission they get mission rewards. If mission fails they on either end, new player is killed mission fails. Have to have good reward more satisfying to null dwelller than ppodding the poorguy.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2013-05-27 14:47:09 UTC
Why: getting people into null to realise its not that dangerous requires getting them through lowsec gatecamps, nullsec bubbles etc would put a lot of people off. This would give high sec new players a taste of null and interaction with nullsec that didnt always end in a quick podding at a low or null choke.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-05-27 15:51:09 UTC
player interaction should not be forced

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2013-05-27 18:16:25 UTC
Reality check: The alliance running that 23/7 bubble camp off that free km route won't be letting you into the action...Lol
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2013-05-27 19:13:01 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
player interaction should not be forced

lol seriously. An option to do a mission with another player who also as the option to do the mission is like calling someone's asking you out on a date ****....

Sabre906 wrote:
Reality check: The alliance running that 23/7 bubble camp off that free km route won't be letting you into the action...

Im not sure if you tried to camp a mission runner by guessing where the mission will spawn, but trying to camp a spawn that randomly appears in the millions of square kilometres of a system, in an entire region of systems is possible but I doubt you'd guess correctly in a few lifetimes... and since the alliance member in the alliance needs the survival of the person doing the mission with them, as well as his cargo which is required to complete the mission it'd be stupid not to let them do it.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2013-05-27 21:38:35 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
player interaction should not be forced

lol seriously. An option to do a mission with another player who also as the option to do the mission is like calling someone's asking you out on a date ****....

Sabre906 wrote:
Reality check: The alliance running that 23/7 bubble camp off that free km route won't be letting you into the action...

Im not sure if you tried to camp a mission runner by guessing where the mission will spawn, but trying to camp a spawn that randomly appears in the millions of square kilometres of a system, in an entire region of systems is possible but I doubt you'd guess correctly in a few lifetimes... and since the alliance member in the alliance needs the survival of the person doing the mission with them, as well as his cargo which is required to complete the mission it'd be stupid not to let them do it.


Nvm, you're just clueless.Lol
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#7 - 2013-05-28 02:03:39 UTC
This topic has been moved to the Features and Ideas Discussion forum.

ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2013-05-28 08:44:18 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
player interaction should not be forced

lol seriously. An option to do a mission with another player who also as the option to do the mission is like calling someone's asking you out on a date ****....

Sabre906 wrote:
Reality check: The alliance running that 23/7 bubble camp off that free km route won't be letting you into the action...

Im not sure if you tried to camp a mission runner by guessing where the mission will spawn, but trying to camp a spawn that randomly appears in the millions of square kilometres of a system, in an entire region of systems is possible but I doubt you'd guess correctly in a few lifetimes... and since the alliance member in the alliance needs the survival of the person doing the mission with them, as well as his cargo which is required to complete the mission it'd be stupid not to let them do it.


Nvm, you're just clueless.Lol

okayyyyyy... thank you for your input

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2013-05-28 09:01:47 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
player interaction should not be forced

lol seriously. An option to do a mission with another player who also as the option to do the mission is like calling someone's asking you out on a date ****....

Sabre906 wrote:
Reality check: The alliance running that 23/7 bubble camp off that free km route won't be letting you into the action...

Im not sure if you tried to camp a mission runner by guessing where the mission will spawn, but trying to camp a spawn that randomly appears in the millions of square kilometres of a system, in an entire region of systems is possible but I doubt you'd guess correctly in a few lifetimes... and since the alliance member in the alliance needs the survival of the person doing the mission with them, as well as his cargo which is required to complete the mission it'd be stupid not to let them do it.



You seem to be implying that the nullsec residents won't just use these missions to farm free easy killmails regardless of mission failures. People in NPC 0.0 aren't exactly the trusting sort.
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts
#10 - 2013-05-28 09:22:08 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
player interaction should not be forced

lol seriously. An option to do a mission with another player who also as the option to do the mission is like calling someone's asking you out on a date ****....

Sabre906 wrote:
Reality check: The alliance running that 23/7 bubble camp off that free km route won't be letting you into the action...

Im not sure if you tried to camp a mission runner by guessing where the mission will spawn, but trying to camp a spawn that randomly appears in the millions of square kilometres of a system, in an entire region of systems is possible but I doubt you'd guess correctly in a few lifetimes... and since the alliance member in the alliance needs the survival of the person doing the mission with them, as well as his cargo which is required to complete the mission it'd be stupid not to let them do it.



You seem to be implying that the nullsec residents won't just use these missions to farm free easy killmails regardless of mission failures. People in NPC 0.0 aren't exactly the trusting sort.


That and they'll be farming these babies as well.
Substantia Nigra
Polaris Rising
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2013-05-31 02:28:31 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Why: getting people into null to realise its not that dangerous requires getting them through lowsec gatecamps, nullsec bubbles etc would put a lot of people off. This would give high sec new players a taste of null and interaction with nullsec that didnt always end in a quick podding at a low or null choke.


1. There are many factions / corps that already have lowsec / nullsec mission agents … including cosmos agents;
2. Some hisec mission agents send you to lowsec;
3. Some of the lvl4 epic arcs have lowsec options;
4. Lvl5 missions are all lowsec;
5. Incursions happen in lowsec / nullsec as well as hisec;
6. That faction warfare stuff is lowsec combo PvE / PvP;
7. The pirate epic arcs are pretty well entirely nullsec-based.

Through selling support packages for the pirate epic arcs, >2 years now, I’ve found a subset of hisec dwellers more than willing to dive off into lowsec / nullsec … if they have an adequate understanding of how things work and feel they are adequately prepared for it all.


I guess I am almost a 'vet' by now. Hopefully not too bitter and managing to help more than I hinder. I build and sell many things, including large collections of bookmarks.