These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Great idea for Ice mining! Now, let's make Missions a finite resource.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ravnik
Infinate Horizon
#21 - 2013-06-12 08:55:21 UTC
If they made a queue for agents, then surely we would need a queue for undocking Shocked

The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long - and you have burned so very, very brightly..........
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#22 - 2013-06-12 09:04:52 UTC
Ravnik wrote:
If they made a queue for agents, then surely we would need a queue for undocking Shocked


I'm all for orderly queues. Queue for docking, undocking, using a star gate.

Then you can wage war by suppressing star gates, or build empires by enhancing them. Imagine if capsuleers got to contribute to empire upkeep through little things like an LP contribution to improve the throughput of the Jita/Perimeter gate?

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#23 - 2013-06-12 09:05:24 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Lets start by making moon goo depletable.


have you thoroughly considered the repercussions of this idea or do you just ignore them

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Signal11th
#24 - 2013-06-12 09:12:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Signal11th
Erotica 1 wrote:
Kara Vix wrote:
And watch as hi sec subscriptions become a limited resource as well. All these idiotic ideas to destroy hi sec never end do they?


Just because others have different ideas from you does not make the ideas idiotic.

If you would take the time to think about it, such a change would equally affect high sec, low sec, and null. Also, it would reduce the number of bots and bot aspirants.

I have a feeling you are not yet a New Order supporter. I suggest checking it out at www.minerbumping.com



easy way to attempt to limit botting is to have a random number generator that gives you a code when you want to accept a mission, takes a real person 5 seconds to enter it.

Package it as a Mission Runner Authorisation code on the mission acceptance screen or what not.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#25 - 2013-06-12 09:14:25 UTC
Andski wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Lets start by making moon goo depletable.


have you thoroughly considered the repercussions of this idea or do you just ignore them


Let's hear it from the expert, forum warrior Andski! Tell us, great Andski, what the repercussions of moon goo depleting after a few months of heavy extraction would be?

Day 0 Advice for New Players
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#26 - 2013-06-12 09:14:40 UTC
You know... there is a section for these kinds of threads. It's called Features & Ideas Discussions.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#27 - 2013-06-12 09:21:18 UTC
I don't agree with the OPs suggestion as-is, but this post was simply so far-off I had to point a few things out.
Elliavir wrote:
Because we should definitely make it so folks who have limited play time have even more limited options on what to do - unless they want to go PvP. That should, of course, stay unlimited.
PvP and PvE are two extremely different things in an MMO as EVE. A game driven by player interaction should not offer the same results if you opt out of as much player interaction as possiblem, compared to those who opt into as much as possible.
PvP is not in the hands of CCP, missions are.

Quote:
We need to do something about those people who stay in station and do market stuff, though. They aren't out PvPing enough. I know, let's put a timer and by-station limits on buy and sell orders! Make you think twice about whether you REALLY want to sell that module right here, right now, eh?
Why does the market have anything to do with this? The player who buys those modules is, if you didn't know, a player. The competing trader trying to sell his modules instead is also, again maybe you were unaware, a player. "Market PvP" isn't traditionally PvP, but in EVE it very much is. Two players competing to take over the same market, even if they never fire a shot at eachother, can be "Player versus Player" just as much as two corps fighting over a moon.
And again, why should CCP suddenly control PvP? They didn't do that before.

Quote:
And why leave out FW pilots? I am sure we can find something to limit for them, too. Wouldn't want them to feel unloved.
Obviously, FW missions should be made scarce alongside all other missions if missions should be nerfed this way. FW anything else ... Hmm, no.
The funny thing for me, however, is that the best counterargument to this has been those who just asked "why", instead of those who tried their best to reason against it. Sometimes, a proposal is actually badly made but when you present it, the detractors are even worse at criticising it, so the bad criticism makes your proposal better by comparison.
I know this from IRL experience, it really does work.

So, to those who don't agree with the OP, think about your own argument before you make your opponents argument better by comparison!
Dame Lanfear
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2013-06-12 09:31:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Dame Lanfear
I seriously doubt any game company would look at limiting content (especially one used by over 70 percent of its player base) as a good thing. Stop trying to find ways to rain on someone elses parade and just enjoy the bloody game already.
marVLs
#29 - 2013-06-12 09:36:49 UTC
What did i just read Shocked that's the stupidest idea i read here from long time Lol
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2013-06-12 09:37:18 UTC
in before closing

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#31 - 2013-06-12 09:37:43 UTC
I got diarrhea from reading this thread
Steve WingYip
Doomheim
#32 - 2013-06-12 09:42:30 UTC
Ruze wrote:
Now, please setup missions to be on a limited basis. Like, one mission per agent every 4 hours. Or even, each agent only gives 25 missions every four hours, and the first mission runners there get the go.

Actually, I like this alot. I know it sounds like sarcasm, but this hisec occupant is serious about it. I feel that making all 'resources' limited and something worth competing over is an awesome concept and needs more focus.

Scale the little guys, like level 1 agents, to be near infinite. But as you go up in the mission difficulty, down goes the number of missions which can be given out every hour, until each agent only gives 25 or 50 (however many would make it worth competing for) missions every four hours. Makes you second guess turning down that losec mission.

Do NOT apply this to FW zones, however, or FW pilots.


This is a dumb idea, the missions have been fine your years and this would just make them stupid. The game already has lots of limited resources and competitive things. You need to leave parts of the game that some people purely like alone.
EvEa Deva
Doomheim
#33 - 2013-06-12 09:45:25 UTC
missions do have a 4 hour timer, every time an agent gives you 2 craptastic missions in a row.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#34 - 2013-06-12 09:54:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Mara Rinn wrote:
Andski wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Lets start by making moon goo depletable.


have you thoroughly considered the repercussions of this idea or do you just ignore them


Let's hear it from the expert, forum warrior Andski! Tell us, great Andski, what the repercussions of moon goo depleting after a few months of heavy extraction would be?


because if you can only mine a moon for three months, once somebody drops a tower on it and gets the extraction going, it'll be theirs until it's dry

i guess if your goal is to discourage actual fights over resources, moon depletion is a grand idea

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Real Folk Spike
The Earth is Round
#35 - 2013-06-12 09:54:55 UTC
How about double or triple the return of LP at the same time? It would be a win win.
Caitlyn Tufy
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-06-12 09:55:26 UTC
Ruze wrote:
Now, please setup missions to be on a limited basis. Like, one mission per agent every 4 hours. Or even, each agent only gives 25 missions every four hours, and the first mission runners there get the go.

Actually, I like this alot. I know it sounds like sarcasm, but this hisec occupant is serious about it. I feel that making all 'resources' limited and something worth competing over is an awesome concept and needs more focus.

Scale the little guys, like level 1 agents, to be near infinite. But as you go up in the mission difficulty, down goes the number of missions which can be given out every hour, until each agent only gives 25 or 50 (however many would make it worth competing for) missions every four hours. Makes you second guess turning down that losec mission.

Do NOT apply this to FW zones, however, or FW pilots.


While I know you're trolling, the idea does have some merit. As it stands, missions are nothing but glorified ratting. However, with the changes to exploration (all probes available from the start) and introduction of new hacking systems, they could be so much more, having more in common with epic arcs than with missions today.

Imagine this scenario:

A player starts at Amarr, learning that a relic was stolen from a local monastery. There are two possible leads: a guy in Mendori claims he knows someone who knows someone, while a small fight with Concord left a few wrecks in Boranai. The player can choose which route to pursuit, either having to travel - and possibly needing to do another mission - or trying to hack the wrecks in order to recover the necessary info. Eventually he needs to cross into low sec or possibly even NPC null, either through regular or through special temporary "smuggler jump bridges" to catch the culprit. Obviously, the further down this road he'd go, the better the rewards, with final fights even having a chance at deadspace mods, but in order to do so, he would need to take increasing risks as well.

Similarily for distribution missions, you could get easy missions to bring two people from A to B (with possible destination C if B was destroyed in the mean time) or a mission to smuggle something from a low sec system through a set of smuggler gates that are unlikely to have empire presence. Safety not guaranteed. :p

Imo, such changes would turn missions from what are essentially isk grinders to enjoyable activity, while at the same time encouraging people to visit null/low sec for more than just PI / FW / whatever.
Tom Gerard
Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
#37 - 2013-06-12 10:14:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Tom Gerard
** LIKE A SCREECHING FIREBALL TOM GERARD DESCENDS UPON THE SCENE, OBSERVING THE CARNAGE HE APPROACHES YOU AND BEGINS TO SPEAK... **

'This idea has merit.'

** TOM GERARD GLANCES ACROSS THE ROOM, FEELING HARSH GLARES AS IF THEY COULD COMBUST HIS VERY SKIN **

'Well then...'

** TOM GERARD PULLS OUT HIS DATAPAD, CONFIRMING HIS CLONE IS PREPARED AND INTACT. **

'This Idea has my approval!'

** THE CROWD RUSHES IN, CURVED MINMATAR BLADES CUT DEEP THROUGH FLESH, A SCREAM IS HEARD BUT IS RAPIDLY OVERTAKEN BY THE ROAR OF THE CROWD AS A DETACHED HEAD IS LIFTED HIGH ABOVE THE CROWD **

Aura: 'So how was your Visit to Eveo?'

** TOM GERARD STRETCHES, AND SMILES AS HE STEPS OUT OF THE CLONING CHAMBER **

'About as well as could be expected'

Now with 100% less Troll.
Amanda Chelian
#38 - 2013-06-12 10:38:07 UTC
Andski wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Andski wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Lets start by making moon goo depletable.


have you thoroughly considered the repercussions of this idea or do you just ignore them


Let's hear it from the expert, forum warrior Andski! Tell us, great Andski, what the repercussions of moon goo depleting after a few months of heavy extraction would be?


because if you can only mine a moon for three months, once somebody drops a tower on it and gets the extraction going, it'll be theirs until it's dry

i guess if your goal is to discourage actual fights over resources, moon depletion is a grand idea


As opposed to now, where everyone knows where the good stuff is and focuses on that?

Limited resource moons will encourage alliances to hold as much territory as they can possibly get their hands on, as more moons under your control means better chances of taking advantages of moon resources.
My Postman
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2013-06-12 10:43:29 UTC
Welcome to every mission runner who is´nt able to log streight after dt.

This is one of the dumbest ideas ever posted, and actually i can´t remember a dumber one.
Tom Gerard
Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
#40 - 2013-06-12 11:14:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Tom Gerard
My Postman wrote:
Welcome to every mission runner who is´nt able to log streight after dt.

This is one of the dumbest ideas ever posted, and actually i can´t remember a dumber one.


This is actually a fantastic idea, it would provide a motivation to leave Hi-Sec vastly increase the value of Loyalty Points and remove the low-brow concept of "mission hubs".

No Missions? Fly over 3 systems and get some there.


BUT TOM!... 3 jumps is a pain in the ass to get there with my Noctis every time.

Well **** then, maybe salvage will be worth something.

Now with 100% less Troll.