Player Features and Ideas Discussion

It wasn't extremely more rewarding. The only difference was increased amount of resource gathering, which no one actually did. Fellucia was also very active on the servers I played. There was probably less skill curve to get into PvP, and much easier to be viable in more situations (you could run solo in that game, see a group of 10 people and manage to get away often)

Problem is:

The majority of people in HS stay there cause prefers that kind of gameplay. The key factor is not the risk or costs/rewards evaluation, they simply do not accept the chance to be forced in unwilled interactions. Resource distribution have to be scaled properly, but IMO the idea that boosting a resouce would prompt people to move in a gameplay they dislike doesn't work. Forcing people in gameplay they dislike only push them to quit.

Generally boosting a resource in an area do not cause people to move there, only benefit who is already living there. Beside I don't see the need to move people...

The rewards you can get in low-sec are already there.

- Running level 5 missions with a friend can usually net a hundred million every hour or two (done this).
- If you can get a "safe" way into low-sec you can make a lot of profit by selling equipment and ships to outlaws (currently doing this).
- Faction War missions and complexes make godly amounts of ISK via Loyalty Points (currently doing this).
- You need FAR less standings to put a POS up in low-sec
- You can moon mine (on a small scale).
- There are open research slots for BPOs (if you look hard enough).
- You can occasionally find 0.0 class asteroids to mine in anomalies (which I mine from time to time).
- There are plenty of players in low-sec with bounties in their head.

The incentives are already there. The price people have to pay is the understanding that they can be shot at by anyone, at any time, anywhere in low-sec. And THAT is what people don't like; the constant "cat and mouse games," the uncertainty of your own safety, the inability to min/max your ship for the one activity you want to partake in (because you can be attacked at any time, so you do PvE in PvP setups).


The problem isn't "there isn't enough money." It's the fear or losing that money in a way that you can't control. That's why carebears stay in high-sec. Once you get over that and see the activity (PvP) as a whole the end goal (reardless of the outcome) then you will be PvPing like the best.
PvP is a "mentality," not an buy/sell order.

Sure there are a lot of ways to make ISK in low sec, but the point of this thread is L1-L4 missions, the bread and butter of high sec mission runners.


Lots of Eve players choose to start out on the "Mission Route" (which is fine, I'm mostly a PvE player myself).
They step up L1->L2->L3->L4 and then they get stagnant in high sec.

Why? Because there is no clear advantage to moving to low sec for mission runners.
1) L4s pay more ISK per hour in High Sec than they pay in low sec.
2) L5 Missions require multiple ships and someone who knows what they are doing (someone you are not likely to find until after you have moved to low sec)

If CCP increased the payout for low sec missions (carrot) and decreased them for high sec (stick) then this L4 Min/Maxers would move to low sec.

Once they had already moved to low sec, all those wonderful opportunities that you mentioned above would be clear as day to them.

I don't see why CCP sets up the *rules* to encourage players to stay in high sec and play single player L4 missions online. Get them out into the broader gameworld where they can create and take advantage of the amazing player content that the EVE universe provides.

Believe it or not, I'm doing it for their (and Eve's) own good.

-FM

Again, I don't think the primary reason Level 4 mission runners stick to high sec because they are "afraid of big bad low sec".

I think they stick to high sec because the ISK/hour is greater there and I also think that is wack.

CCP can't directly do anything about people being "afraid of big bad low sec".

CCP can change the "rules" so that mission ISK/hour in low sec is greater than the ISK/hour in high sec.

The people that are still "afraid of big bad low sec" will stay in high sec and keep running missions and still have more ISK than they can spend.

The people that mission in high sec to maximize their ISK per hour while missioning will just move to low sec when it makes sense from an ISK/hour point of view.

Yes it will take them longer to complete each mission in low sec, yes they will sometimes have to doc up or switch systems because of scanners, yes they will occasionally lose as ship (I lose maybe 2 ships to pirates per year running L5s).

Therefore the mission payments in low sec need to be much greater (I suggest 4x high sec) to not only make it a valid alternative to high sec level 4s, but actually encourage people to get up off their lazy space ass and move out to low.

-FM

I have nothing against low sec missions get payed more, BUT and this is a big but, LV4s in high are fine as they are, id actually say scale up L1-L3s in high abit, and you probably ask why, well i am in CAS, and one thing that come up alot, is how do i make ISK when your new, many of you vets forget that prices for ships has got alot more expensive, and many that start only have their one toon, to get them going and actually be able to fit afew combat ships and not get stuck with mining, wich is at moment one off the few things they can do that payes reasonably well, while they skill and get standing for L3s, im not saying they should get stuck with missions, but its a income to fall back on to get new ships... the faster new players can afford to loose stuff, the more willing they are to risk things, the harder they need to work for it, the more likely it is they get stuck in a rut...

cool story bro