These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Exploration, Risk vs. Reward, T3 ships and DED 4/10s
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Umega
Solis Mensa
#221 - 2013-04-01 04:57:35 UTC
Tzu Wu wrote:
Would you all like some cheese to go with your whine?

Nothing personal Mio.It's just aggravating when all I see is "nerf tengus,nerf 4/10's" seems like a lot of people are just po'ed they dont make as much isk as others.I say improve lowsec and nullsec before dumbing down hisec.


While there does need to be some.. and some significant.. changes to low/null. The best buff is somehow getting more able and better than clueless people out into them. Rather than taking 'throw them out there' approach.. or throw the cookies out there. It hasn't worked like that in the past.. no sense it will again. Need a different approach to accomdate people's desire, yet unwillingness to submit to change in scenary. Need to fine tune that fear of loss.. into excitement.

Wealth/ship changes isn't going to fix this. Never has.. never will. That arguement both sides use needs to die already.

Here's a little secret...

The biggest impact in low/null always is.. and always will be.. a new, charismatic leader that rises up and puts foot to throat. Whom's only concern is to create chaos, through order.. dismantle those around, simply for entertainment. The thrill of the moment, the sensation surging through your core of victory.. nothing more. Not wealth. Not power wielded to undermine followers faith.

Some old/current leaders that have believed in such.. able to harness enough allies to arms and push them willingly towards a common goal of fiery hell.. are either gone, and/or grown tired of the mental/emotion grind being a leader brings, or corrupt and 'fat'. Also.. Difficult it is.. to spend so much effort and time building a castle amongest the fleeting sands.. to want to abandon it and move on to new locations/grounds/ideas/purpose when that castle shines at first. Deals are made to keep that castle secure.. stagnant happens. And there lays a lil nugget of truth...

Some current powers that be.. or afraid to let go. Just as highsec players are afraid to risk ship.. and let go. Deflection.. I think no other word describs propoganda better than Deflection. The larger point.. is for another thread.. another time. Don't mean to derail the main objective of this thread. My apologizes.

 Ume-Pro Studios
Kodama Ikari
Thragon
#222 - 2013-04-01 06:58:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Kodama Ikari
holy crap, those are three, really long, rambling, yelling-at-clouds kind of posts.

Some first-hand PI tips
Makavelia
National Industries
#223 - 2013-04-01 17:16:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Makavelia
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Fact remains that it will take a new pilot quite a bit longer to even begin working with a T3 compared to a BC. They can fly BCs effectively in hisec PvE before they have achieved T2 weapons/drones/whatever. Its not optimal compared to T2 fit BC. Its not optimal compared to T3. Of course not. Its T1 vs T3. Meta BC -> T2 fit BC -> faction fit T3 is the pretty standard progression path by now. I would certainly hope a T3 ship is more efficient than a T1 ship. Its like saying battlecruisers are better than cruisers at 4/10s so battlecruisers should be banned from them. Ban T1 cruisers from 3/10 as well then, since all you need is a frigate.

The X5 vs X6 training time is offest not only by support skills but also the subsystem skills. And yeah, people do lose T3s in hisec believe it or not. I don't know how, but they do.

I fly a Loki by the way. It spanks Tengus in Angel sites. But it seems a little slower against Guristas. I will probably train Tengu as well to be more efficient there. Or an Ishtar. Or both. I started with the Hurricane, and have BC5 trained.


The BC is limited to 1 profiteble site in high sec. Maybe the T3 should not be banned from 4/10.. but then why should bc remain banned from 3/10?. T3 wins BC on every front so i see no reason for such limitation on a lesser vessel.

The only justification of this ship is that its ''T3'' and that's suppose to mean it's better in every way than anything else. Well, take a look at mods. T2 mods are better than t1, but often come with greater cpu/pg/cap use leaving consideration in fitting (you will often have to downgrad other mods in setups to fit X t2s).

T3 ships break a lot of the limitations placed on other ships (hull size - dps/tank/speed ratio) and are just win win win on every front. It does not end there, lets not forget these ships were actualy designed to be very hard to catch in hostile grounds. You would have to be pretty damn unlucky/cocky to lose a T3 doing hostile exploration. Eventualy it wil happen, but what was it.. 4 days to re-train?. Not like you have a dire need to train much else after T3 anyway apart from........... (wait for it).......... more T3's.


Anyway, glad you use a locki. Makes a change from seing all this tengu online. Even though i'd rathe rbe up against a tengu than a locki o0.


One more thing. I would not like to jump my bc into a 5/10. I'd be taking a BS.. the training time to fit a decent bs HUGELY shadows T3. For the gank and tank you get with a BS (still in the relams of t3 though) you get a big slow ass hull that heavily relys on drones to kill scramers. That's the kinde balnce factors t3's avoid. I get, it.. again it's back to this ''but it's T3'' nonsence. again, lose 4 days training.. /care?.. you don't need to train a bs once in a T3.

So t3 makes all t1 cruisers / bc / bs's nion pointless but lets justify it on some sp loss in the event you are to lose it.
Oguras
Tuczniki Omega
#224 - 2013-04-01 21:17:12 UTC
Heh, wasn't surprised with the changes proposed by players here; "my own closed plexes" vs "DED ffa".

Seriously, what's the big f-deal? 4/10 don't make more than l4's really. I'd say it's pointless to do them unless you are bored by lvl4's (so you can kill that boredom running some even more tedious and repetitive content).

As of t3's; jeez, stop the whine and do something about it. Buy some tornadoes and go pop few with some friends instead.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#225 - 2013-04-01 23:44:40 UTC
Makavelia wrote:

So t3 makes all t1 cruisers / bc / bs's nion pointless but lets justify it on some sp loss in the event you are to lose it.


If you are in a T3 and you know you are going to pop, eject before you pop. This way you do not lose the SP. You only lose SP if you are in the ship when it goes pop.
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#226 - 2013-04-02 06:52:51 UTC
@Makavelia: I suppose I can see your point, to a degree. I haven't used my Hurricane in hisec PvE since getting the Loki. But I'm still finding use for Minmatar Battleships 5... whereas In the case of the Tengu, there isn't much point to training for a Raven/Golem. I have a character currently training Caldari Battleships to 5, but for the Nightmare, not for Caldari ships. I have no plans to train Cruise Missiles or Hybrids on him. Haha. Cruise missiles and Caldari battleships may be buffed in the upcoming changes though, who knows.

But yes, maxing out a T3 is far easier than maxing out a battleship. Battleships are king in incursions though, T3s don't see much use there. And it seems the Tengu is the only T3 used in lvl 4s extensively, and I'm sure its outclassed by the Machariel, the Vargur, and the Nightmare. And perhaps the Navy Dominix and Rattlesnake as well? Maybe some others? I don't know, I'm not much of a missioner and haven't flown many battleships outside of Minmatar.

So Tengu/T3s aren't really the end all be all of hisec PvE. The only place the Tengu truly dominates is Guristas 4/10, which just happens to be the most profitable and sought after 4/10. And as I've stated before, there will always be a ship that is most efficient at that site, and so people will gravitate towards it. If not the Tengu, then something else. Guristas 4/10 will always be hotly contested in hisec.

I think the biggest thing that would **** me off about T3s being banned from 4/10 is losing the probing bonus. I'd have to put up with crappy probe strength on a Sleipnir/Gila/Ishtar or... ugh... use a probing alt. And most of the people complaining now would still be complaining, because what they really want is their own personal site sectioned off from the rest of the players. But I'll still run sites I find regardless if theres already someone there. And if I'm in a cheaper T2 or T1 ship, I'll be more inclined to just steal the loot if I don't get the kill. Why not, less ISK on the line and no skill loss if I die. I'll have even more people cursing me in local and adding me under terrible standing than I do already. :(

Anyway, my security status has hit 5.0 it seems. Since you hate Tengus so much, and are a fellow BC5 Minmatar pilot, care to get together in some suicide Tornados sometime and camp a 4/10? Twisted
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#227 - 2013-04-02 07:01:51 UTC
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
Anyway, my security status has hit 5.0 it seems. Since you hate Tengus so much, and are a fellow BC5 Minmatar pilot, care to get together in some suicide Tornados sometime and camp a 4/10? Twisted

Odds are the Tengus will drop better faction loot than the Telescope, and you only have to scan the site down once!
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#228 - 2013-04-02 08:17:57 UTC
I've got it! Shift Guristas' weakness from kinetic to thermal. That will reduce those Tengus a bit. (and replace them with Lokis) Blink
Makavelia
National Industries
#229 - 2013-04-02 12:54:26 UTC
Suicide ganking (in our case) is just a dumb idea. Besides, not every T3 player is a tard. Karma larma.

Contact me in-game though, we can work up a more humble alternitave.
Cain Aloga
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#230 - 2013-04-03 04:34:12 UTC
Umega wrote:
Anyone that believes exploration sites should be instanced in any way shape or form.. should biomass, and play one of the MANY MANY other games that already have such implemented.. rather than try to screw over the people that believe EVE should remain the open sandbox it is.

Exploration should have risks and competition. There should be the thought/concern of pirates, plunderers, 'vikings', people bent on a Holy Crusade to gather what they precieve as their valuables, people seeking knowledge, people seeking fame/fortune, other explorers.. did Indiana Jones have ruthless competition or no? While it was just a movie.. the idea of explorers going against each other is reality.

One aspect that caused the shitstorm that was Incarna.. is that locked door. Isolated.. people unable to walk with their peers, walk amongest the most noble of persona, to the lowest scum. Why should we push ourselves further towards never realizing our own Tatoine? By making exploration instanced.. we would have another 'locked door' thrown in front of us. More and more isolated we would become.. all for what? A repeatative grind that may, or may not grant money.

**** your Greed.. you low-life pukes that wish to close yourselves off from everyone else, just so you can do what you believe you are entitled to do, simply because you breath. I breath that same air.. and I doubt you'll use it more effectively than I. Cowards.. weak.. crying for a barrier to protect them, so they can gather wealth with no thought of Retribution.

An Odyssey is best remembered.. when it is memorable.

Changes

- No one in NPC corps can access above 2/10. Why? Competition. If you make a career out of exploring.. others with the same career path should have the option to come after you.. or atleast hire mercs to gun you down. If you want to play like a kiddie and be protected by some virtual papa-bear Concord.. you should be treated like one, and only get the kiddie sandbox.

- Adjust the difficulty of all sites. Make them harder.. to the point you may need a friend or two in cruisers to handle a 4/10. Do not compare this to Incursions.. a friend or two is hardly like trying to tackle an Incursion. Make it so it is possible to handle the lower ones solo, but at a greater risk. Don't got balls to risk a pimp ship, don't go. No one is making you.

- Make the rats attacker others that enter, more wildly. Sleeper like. This would promote lowsec anom growth.. pve tanks tend to have better surviviable abilities than pvp fit ships.. if a lone pirate or two want to try, they can try.. but at risk to them as well. Risk/reward works both ways folks.

- Add more lore to the sites. Make them more engaging for your mind.. rather than a hotkey mash fest.

- Add puzzles. Adjust them in such a way.. that a loner, trying to cherry pick boss spawns is going to have a much more difficult time to do so.

- Grant suspect flag to anyone that loots a boss spawn (or final 'treasure chest').. whether it is their wreck or not. Spare me the waaah-waah.. I almost was going to agree with someone turning exploration sites into Concord free.. but realized that isn't beneficial to greenhorns, and ultimately EVE's learning curve growth. In this way.. highsec is still highsec, but the risk/reward increases. Not too mention.. 15 minutes of suspect, is really going to slow down the cherry pickers movements. Atleast the less brash and brave ones.

If I were given an option to choose wealth or adventure.. I'll pick adventure. Especially here, in a video game where I try to escape reality. I want an adventure.. if I wanted more wealth, I'd spend more rl time accumlating rl wealth.

It's not a rant. I choose to speak like this, when I see people acting like lil bitches. They need to be addressed, and treated like the bitches they are. If you can't handle that.. oh well. When you care about the core of this game, rather than yourselves.. I'll give a damn. Till then.. suck it.


I am quoting this wall of text because I agree with everything it says.

I am just now getting into exploration, flying around republic space with my probe, So i dont really have much experience, so instead this post will be more about what I (considering myself a noob/greenhorn/ what ever you'd like) think exploration and why I want to get into it, to maybe provide a different point of view.

I am not getting into exploration for the isk. If i wanted to make money, I wouldn't be playing eve and instead go and get a second job. What I envision exploration to be is a players going out and doing what the name suggests....explore. Everything from High sec to Low, null and Worm Hole Space; regardless of the empire. I fell it should be about the wonder of going out and exploring the sandbox. If people want to only want to fly Caldari space for the loot that's fine, but that shouldn't stop other people who dont care as much from venturing out.

If I wanted to grind through endless waves of pirates and other NPC's i wouldn't be exploring, so having to clear a room in order to go further or get the drop to me would ruin the entire point. If your afraid that some one will zip in and steal your prize, get a faster ship. If your afraid you might lose your expensive ship in low sec then dont fly an expensive ship.

As it stands, my goal is too get into a loki, train to fly it effectively, and once that happens, begin exploring Eve, not having to dock up for as long as i can go with out having to. As far as isk goes, I just want to make enough to support my character as im off doing that. anything else is a bonus. Until then, I'll just stick to my probe, figure exploration out, and practice.

This is just my perspective, and maybe can shed some light on the topic from a noobs point of view.

While our warriors fight for our people's freedom, we in turn should fight for our people's prosperity.
Sebastion Heorod
Hellion Support Services
#231 - 2013-04-04 09:11:50 UTC
OP is correct, risk/reward is skewed, all explorers should stay in hi sec
marVLs
#232 - 2013-04-04 12:16:12 UTC
Didn't read all pages but from my experience doing all kinds of exploration in HS, LS, WH (from C1 to C3):


  • HS 4/10 - yup only in T3 (btw how many times i steal loot from tengus in my 100mn ham legion, it was funCool) but those sites are rare, many dudes searching for them, takes a loooot of flying, scanning (and gets boring) to earn some good ISK (but once i got invu for 1bil from 4/10 angel siteBear)
    • In tearms of earning ISK incursions and lvl4 are better
    Personally i would increase numbers of sites in HS but decrease loot value (more action, income the same, and change sites mechanic so T3 are not the only option)

  • LS deds are not worth doing, too much risk in solo and craaaaaapy income when doing with friends, but mags and radars in Pilgrim are fun
    • I would increase numbers of sites just a little and most important chance to get drop should be biiig so You wanna risk scanning and doing sites because You know there's a 75% chance to get drop

  • WH sites, meeeh not bad income but not so good as some peoples think either

Johnson 1044
Johnson Organic Produce
#233 - 2013-04-04 12:58:22 UTC
Ciba Lexlulu wrote:
IMHO, CCP can fix all the issues with one simple change, i.e., adjust so that Concord has no jurisdiction inside ALL DED sites. This means player can engage other players in DED sites even in highsec.



This is an idea with some merit although I'm not sure about it. Either this or remove DED 4/10 from highsec altogether will fix the problem.
Makavelia
National Industries
#234 - 2013-04-04 21:15:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Makavelia
marVLs wrote:
Didn't read all pages but from my experience doing all kinds of exploration in HS, LS, WH (from C1 to C3):


  • HS 4/10 - yup only in T3 (btw how many times i steal loot from tengus in my 100mn ham legion, it was funCool) but those sites are rare, many dudes searching for them, takes a loooot of flying, scanning (and gets boring) to earn some good ISK (but once i got invu for 1bil from 4/10 angel siteBear)
    • In tearms of earning ISK incursions and lvl4 are better
    Personally i would increase numbers of sites in HS but decrease loot value (more action, income the same, and change sites mechanic so T3 are not the only option)

  • LS deds are not worth doing, too much risk in solo and craaaaaapy income when doing with friends, but mags and radars in Pilgrim are fun
    • I would increase numbers of sites just a little and most important chance to get drop should be biiig so You wanna risk scanning and doing sites because You know there's a 75% chance to get drop

  • WH sites, meeeh not bad income but not so good as some peoples think either



I completely disagree. Sites in high sec (especialy 4/10) should be reduced and in turn loot is less available = higher sales price. This makes high sec a cluster fk of high compitition for very limited sites and will force all but the most determined OR complete carebear explorers out of high sec. The sites reduced from high sec should spawn in low sec.

On the flip side, low sec sites become alot more profitable, even in groups. If it's that profiteble, players will 100% group up with mixes of pve/pvp protection vessels, and this is all good news imo for the game. I'm not risk averse.. but i simply don't enjoy losing a fully pve fit ship to a tard pirate blob. I would however take great pleasure in fitting a pvp fit protection ship and protecting what's ours.

I also think scanning should be made harder. Exploration has become so damn easy, everybody and their mother can do it with **** poor profesion skills compared to other eve ventures. As i recently learned.. take a loot into T2 ship invention + production, look at the god awefull amounts of skills/time/effort needed compared to easy mode HS exploration. A lot of other things in eve are taking far more training and effort than exploration.. it's rather sad.

Incursion is easy (after you have trained to decent BS skills mind you), but IMO it's balanced out by the fact that you at-least need to get a gorup of people together, added SP aside.

-edit. I also strongly hold the opinion that any type of site can spawn in any type of space. In a player owned market with modules that are ofc going to be more favoured.... it is jus tsilly that entire areas of eve space is just not porfitable thnx to the current drop system. It also adds another interesting dynamic to exploration in that all but few ships will be able to fit to run it all, at-least with-ought astation pit stop. Obviously its also a nice addition to never truly know what combat/prof site type you are going to get. I like that idea of random.


Edit 2. If anybody at ccp reads this, please fix the god damn filters. It's like getting a level 4 mission, warping to it.. then discovering it's actualy a level 1 mission.

If a player wants to do T2 rig production then by all means, let the fker filter out nothing but mag sites.. and make those damn sites worth while to his chosen path. Consider making a ship that has a bonus spacificly to doing mag sites, and has X amount more chance of gaining T2 salvy from a can.

I know i said donn't make exploraiton easy, but you can ofc allow people to specialise in 1 part of its many ventures. Make the sites harder in turms of rats, if needs be. Do the same for rads.. and all else.
marVLs
#235 - 2013-04-04 22:26:32 UTC
Makavelia wrote:

I completely disagree. Sites in high sec (especialy 4/10) should be reduced and in turn loot is less available = higher sales price. This makes high sec a cluster fk of high compitition for very limited sites and will force all but the most determined OR complete carebear explorers out of high sec. The sites reduced from high sec should spawn in low sec.


Don't ever try to force someone to do something, that's the biggest mistake, and it's always bringing opposite effect.
Never tell others how they should play ffs...

LS is broken not HS

PIMPing LS ded drops would be bad either without changing sites mechanics, that wont make players run them in groups but only will prefer more tengus and PIMPed solo players who will take those expensive loot for themselfs.

Example fixes:
Solo way: Make LS deds very easy PVE so You can do it with not expensive fully PVP fitted ship
MMO way: PIMP drop chance and value but change sites mechanics so you need few players to do it, not by buffing NPCs because this won't work but by for example: one player need to sit near some structure to unlock another gates thats far away for second player, sit near something so invu field of overseer structure get vulnerable for other players, 2-3 players need to activate in the same time some stuff thats far away one of each other to unlock gates, spawn, structure etc
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#236 - 2013-04-05 17:53:27 UTC
marVLs wrote:

Don't ever try to force someone to do something, that's the biggest mistake, and it's always bringing opposite effect.
Never tell others how they should play ffs...

for example: one player need to sit near some structure to unlock another gates thats far away for second player, sit near something so invu field of overseer structure get vulnerable for other players, 2-3 players need to activate in the same time some stuff thats far away one of each other to unlock gates, spawn, structure etc


Yeah, that won't be completely boring or disadvantage people without two accounts at all...

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Makavelia
National Industries
#237 - 2013-04-06 13:53:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Makavelia
marVLs wrote:
Makavelia wrote:

I completely disagree. Sites in high sec (especialy 4/10) should be reduced and in turn loot is less available = higher sales price. This makes high sec a cluster fk of high compitition for very limited sites and will force all but the most determined OR complete carebear explorers out of high sec. The sites reduced from high sec should spawn in low sec.


Don't ever try to force someone to do something, that's the biggest mistake, and it's always bringing opposite effect.
Never tell others how they should play ffs...

LS is broken not HS

PIMPing LS ded drops would be bad either without changing sites mechanics, that wont make players run them in groups but only will prefer more tengus and PIMPed solo players who will take those expensive loot for themselfs.

Example fixes:
Solo way: Make LS deds very easy PVE so You can do it with not expensive fully PVP fitted ship
MMO way: PIMP drop chance and value but change sites mechanics so you need few players to do it, not by buffing NPCs because this won't work but by for example: one player need to sit near some structure to unlock another gates thats far away for second player, sit near something so invu field of overseer structure get vulnerable for other players, 2-3 players need to activate in the same time some stuff thats far away one of each other to unlock gates, spawn, structure etc


Don't ever put bs words into my mouth. Nothing but your own greed or search for thrill will put you into low sec.

LS exploration is only deemed as bad in context of how good HS is. Guess what though, if HS does not work out you still have a few other very profiteble carebear activitys to do.

Theirs plenty of ways to make LS more ''desired'' (it's not that people don't want to go there). One of such changes would be to only allow active mod drops in low sec. Obvious result... the greedy fks only in it for the isk will stop doing HS. That means the lower SP players will find more sites and actualy have a reason to grow and keep training into exploration.

The t3 HS tards bring nothing to this game. What do they do?, log on for a few hours.. go probe out the same select number of systems, make a few bil a month, then masturbate over their wallet?. Cool story of a selfish player base(insert small TM thingy). You 100% DO NOT NEED THAT ISK BECUASE YOU ARE TO SCARED TO EVER RELY ON IT.

What i would LIKE, is the option (and the poeple willing) to go into low sec as a fighting force. The choices to kill and defend, and still the thrill and unknown of loot drops in the sites. That's adding things to eve. Pirates may actualy gain some respect from me too... instead of my opinion of them being nothing but pussys who blob pve fit ships. I'm sure they would also be happy of a worthy fight, and would be damn happy to make a lot more isk in low to fuel on.

Atm it's very difficult to get anybody to come low sec with me, from the exploration channel. That's a sad thing.. the channel dedicated to exploration has most of it's players knowing the truth of how pointless, or just too scared to go.

But hell, it's ccp game, they shape it how they see fit. If they wanne hang onto a TARD player base get on with it.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#238 - 2013-04-06 23:31:03 UTC
Funny how people keep saying high sec exploration has too much reward v risk.

Funny how there isn't a lot of high sec exploration sites available (except w-holes).

Funny how high sec Gankers keep saying remove Concord from high sec sites.

Funny how those who don't fly T3 Cruisers keep saying ban them from high sec sites.

Funny how low sec PvP's keep saying move 4/10's out of high sec.

Funny how Blitzers keep saying remove locks from acceleration gates.

Funny how I keep using the word Funny.

Roll

Actually, it's not funny at all.


The problem is that most high sec explorers won't do low sec exploration due to one simple reason. They're not looking for PvP action, plain and simple. If they were, they would just go sit on a gate in low sec.

It won't make a difference if the loot drops in low sec sites are buffed and high sec sites are nerfed. Moving 4/10's and Vigil sites to low sec won't change anything nor will restricting T3's from high sec sites. Even if all of these conditions were made active, most explorers still wouldn't do low sec sites.

Why?

Right off the bat it's too much time, hassle and work involved. Players would need to create safe spots in systems they intend to scan. Then they have to constantly keep an eye on local chat as well as spam directional scanner while running the sites, always ready to warp out if combat probes show or if another player lands on grid due to being fitted for PvE. Lets not forget that small gang PvP's looking to blob solo ships roam low sec whereas most explorers run solo.

It's the nature of the beast. Without a measure of safety added to low sec sites, most high sec explorers just won't run them. The big question here is how to entice high sec explorers into doing low sec exploration sites without nerfing high sec.


DMC

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Eight Two
SWIFT Inc.
#239 - 2013-04-06 23:54:13 UTC
Seriousl guys, relax.

Changes to the system are two months away now and this is the chance to voice our opinion in a reasonable manner. Nobody, let alone CCP, is going to sift through yet another giant threadnought to maybe find one or two suggestions burried in the usual epeen drivel.

According to last year's fanfest presentation, exploration is people's favorit PVE activity and it's damn well time CCP is taking a proper look at it. If they need further encouragement, they should probably keep an eye on the exploration channel to see first hand why the year-long veterans are rather feeding their wallet in highsec than scanning in low or null.

It's the same as in null. Give people an easy way to get fat, rich and lazy with simplistic generic ISK printing templates and players will drain every last cent out of the system.

As much as I hate the carebear ISKwhoring in highsec, what this exploration system needs is proper content in scope of the recently announced "conflict drivers". Give people a reason to leave highsec rather than forcing them to play one way or the other. If there's an incentive people will do it, simple as that.

Also, I believe exploration desperately lacks diversity. Why are there no sites to make Battleship exploration feasible? Why does it always have to be:

1. Undock T3/Gila/Ishtar
2. Warp to site
3. Kill x brainless rats. Alternatively press one button to activate a module on a can.
4. ???????
5. Profit.

Aren't we supposed to explore and interact with the "unkown"? Why can't we operate codebreakers/analyzers ourselves with skills to go with it? Have player skill (as in skill at recognizing and solving problems) dictate success rather than sheer SP number.

Yes it may end up being more work and yes things like that may interfere with your overglorified isk/hour ratio. But quite frankly if CCP actually comes up with engaging content rather than the usual old generic template than I'm not really sorry for your loss. To whom it may concern.

CCP has proven in the past that they can come up with PVE content that actually is worthwhile and a step up from the endless tedium that are lvl4s, mining, ratting and the likes. See Incursions or WH-Space.
Umega
Solis Mensa
#240 - 2013-04-07 06:19:14 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Funny how people keep saying high sec exploration has too much reward v risk.

-snip-

DMC


Funny how.. some people attempt to deflect the problem as being something other than their own personal interests.

Explain why there shouldn't be any kind of nerf to highsec sites?

I find it difficult to take you even remotely seriously when you pretty much state that players shouldn't have to work harder for more. But that is to be expected from someone that nurses and defends EVE's current NPC corp setup tooth n nail. Strange.. how EVE is one of, if not the most, harsh MMO games out there. Yet.. how many other games grant such rich rewards to those that don't leave the safety nest of the 'beginner town'. In just about all other MMOs.. it takes groups of people, where you HAVE to do your job, to maybe get your hands on some of the most prized things. EVE.. can make a fortune, fly the best ships, get the best mods.. all while sitting in the comforts of an NPC corp. Less work involved, not having to run or contribute to a corp/alliance.. yet with plenty of the perks still in place to grab. This.. needs to change.

Here is why...

You don't overly cuddle and spoil your child.. this turns them rotten. Protect them from the dangers of the 'world'.. how will they ever go further on their own when they being overly protected and cuddled 23.5/7? Water Boy.

It is best to empower them. Make them believe they are capable of achieving more.. if they work for it. Those are the type of changes that need to happen.. and I believe part of my list (posted earlier) helps instrument that tune. It makes people better than they thought they could be.. this, believe it or not, is very good and creates for a more healthy experince despite the 'carnage' of the game.

Why shouldn't people have to fight harder, risk more, if they want more? Why should there be more safety measures added that greatly favor the low-sec solo explorer? Measures should work equally for both sides of the spectrum, and not favor either.

Don't drop some bullshit line on me that people shouldn't have to PvP if they don't want to. There doesn't have to be consent in EVE. You don't HAVE to combat PvP in null/low/wh if you looking for PvE. And you are PvP'ing people in highsec exploration by trying to scan down, and accomplish the objective to open the 'treasure chest' before someone else does already, that is player vs player.

For someone that tries, and does help people in EVE.. DMC. Some of your ideals are whacked, and find a lot of them to be a disease upon the very core and foundation of this EVE Universe. Instead of looking for a shield all the damn time.. look for the sword. I believe you smart enough to realize I don't mean sword as only a weapon, but a tool to drive through towards a goal. What a wonderful feeling that is.. Success vs Failure. Why deny people that sensation?

 Ume-Pro Studios