Missions & Complexes

"wah wah someone quoted me and posted emoticons it must be a troll." Sure buddy, if it makes you feel better. I'll have you know I was exploring long before apocrypha. I had bookmark sets for quest probes set out in several constellations. Back then we had low SP, and clearing out the Maze and the Provincial HQ were team efforts. I don't care that you suggested adjusting triggers and removing shortcuts, its worth considering. I was laughing at you because your white-knighting for PVE content, CCP's "hard work," and "common courtesy" against blitzing is all kind of funny in light of what exploration means in lowsec and nullsec, where minimizing risk to your loot pinata is mandatory and grinding through unnecessary battleships for your e-honor is objectively foolish.

That said I did not address your comment about restricting blitzing options. This is definitely something CCP could do if they wanted players spending more time shooting red crosses. I'm against it for primarily two reasons. Firstly, it would take a bit of the mystery out of the sites, knowing the secret triggers, or having explorer's knowledge of the site, to do it, trigger structures would have to be removed or made temporarily invulnerable. Secondly, it would make a few sites moderately more annoying. (Pirate) Base would take longer to hit the trigger structure, the first room of Military Complex wouldn't be skippable. After clearing a 5 room site (with no shortcuts as it is), its kind of nice to plink the boss in the last room right off the bat and then have the option to gtfo or clear the last few battleships.

Whats the upside of changing triggers? Noobs are still gonna get smoked by t3 4/10 farmers. Sites may take slightly longer, but people are still gonna trawl around for GSOs all day every day. Triggers and self locking gates (which have been buggy in the past) would need an overhaul, resulting in headaches for explorers for years to come. TBH, if you're not getting enough time in shooting missiles at crosses, try going somewhere were you have to shoot the big crosses for once. I assure you, those sites have plenty of big crosses that are not skippable/blitzable. In the meantime, keep shovelin' that **** and pretending to know something.

Also lol, just saw this quote:
Hahaha, yes, there are SO many options to "pvp" a cloaked t3 while it immediately warps cloaked to a safespot in lowsec and proceeds to probe. You're forgetting that its trivially easy to be safe once you've passed the first gate. Well, you would be forgetting, if you knew something about game mechanics. You're also forgetting that both consumable and permanent keys are terrible game mechanics that inhibit collaborative play.



This is basically true. In the case of the 4/10s though, you can have plenty of dps for the 4/10 while sporting a covert sub. If you're going to cherry pick 4/10s in hisec, doing it in lowsec is just as viable/easy. I'm cautious about nerfing DSPs specifically. If done haphazardly it would be hell on WH dwellers. Furthermore, using DSPs to select a sig band does lock you out of several profitable sites in lowsec/nullsec, that is, its only a "problem" in hisec. The changes you sig strengths you listed would both buff DSPs and nerf cherry picking sites. I recommend you post in features and ideas ASAP.

The GSO static band has a radar, a mag, a wh, and the watch encounter on it. I spent 4 hours being reminded of that this week already.

As I said in another thread, the dsp is convenient and saves you some mindless clicking. I can place 32au probes sufficiently offset from planet clusters to get interpretable readings for sig str, I certainly do not need to actually probe sigs without dsps.

IMO changing up bands would be terrible as it would be yet another grindy gaming system with no optimal, and no method for the player to improve at the task - and moving the probes in accurate flicks (which yes I do) doesn't count. The dsp results especially when hunting 3/10s do need interpretation. I see tengus clearly doing fullscans all the time anyway, because its not hard to see whether or not their probes are centered on you when you are in a GSO with your d-scan.

Risk is probability of a loss multiplied by the cost of the loss.
Reward is relatively simple usually, but in the case of exploration I would put it as probability of a drop multiplied by the cost of the drop.

I would argue, in here, however, that it is not the hi sec that is "broken" but the low sec. You have relatively safe hi sec and null sec (in blue space) and somewhere inbetween is the suburb you drive through windows up and doors closed.

I do not have good solutions for "buffing" low sec without breaking everything. Buff it too much and it will be farmed as even when you get killed from time to time it will be still worth it. Leave it as it is and its not really worth it. Only "good" idea I have is putting something unique in low sec so the market will, evetually, balance at "fair" price for that stuff. Currently, in the case of shields mods its just that they all do sort of the same so you have alternatives with minor stat differences in this regard.

How does that fix the problem when T3 will simply scan down faster than any other combat ship?. Even if they are slightly behind in finding the plex for random sig luck they still have a huge advantedge in rushing in and stealing the loot.

I apologize profusely for making use of a subsystem that CCP added, and using said subsystem for its intended purpose.

PROFUSELY!

Actually, on behalf of CCP I apologize for the introduction of the T3 cruiser line into the game. Even though I have no affiliation with CCP.

I'm of the general opinion that low/null sec should be buffed in certain respects--particularly in industry and the like--and high sec nerfed in those respects, but when it comes to this debate over exploration in high sec I don't see why anything should be changed. You pay a high price for relative security--if anything, that price should be higher--and that price includes player competition, market saturation, etc.

The fact is, no one--not even the OP--is clear about what the problem is, if there is one, and what its solutions should be, if any. So who cares?

Bolded the relevant part. I meant to make them lowsec only. I thought this was obvious, but i guess not.

The solution to hisec competition and hisec cherry picking. More specifically, the problem of hisec explo being zero-risk, extremely fast, and very profitable once you have a handful of skills trained and 400m isk for a tengu. More Lowsec explorers isn't necessarily a stated goal.


As pointed out, you still often have to scan 10 signals as it is. the DSP is a tool, it doesn't make everything automatically easy. As I asserted, there is no way that CCP will change loot tables or nerf shield boosters, or change signature mechanics.

They are fast when you find them,I wish you gl finding them that often.Tengu is hardly 400 mill but that is not issue at all I guess.Cherry picking is mostly in Caldari space.Players that actually do exploring do radars and unrated sites too,and escalations.Skill wise you can do 6/10 in Drake with not more skills than for Tengu and it cost you less.Moving them to low sec fully will not make any difference ,players will just do something else.So players that actually visit all parts of empire not just Caldari space need to be punished?
If your goal is to make players start venturing to low sec in quest for more isk,well nothing will change and you know that.They will mine all day long and dont bother.So taking away is not giving nothing to both sides.



Yes it is tool but you will hardly find 10 signals in band of ded 4 site.I never ever found that ,and I scan for long time ,before DSP chart was up.So you want to tell me when players didnt know about this tool there was problems of this kind in Caldari space?I did those sites in Drake that was slow as snail and maybe once per week someone warped in.So tool or not if people dont know what to cherry pick they will not do that.

I dont mind if you nerf all in high sec to ground ,but I dont see point in so much crying about something that actually ask for effort.What is even more funny for me as someone that makes most of isk from exploring I will even benefit from your proposal ,cause then those modules will be even more expensive.

Is this another "make high sec easier" threads?

If you want to nerf DSP then you also should nix combat probes being able to pick up explo sites. You can do the same with cores, but its harder to do without having a spreadsheet open to figure out the effect range will have on the sig str.