These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Alexila Quant
Versatility Production Corporation' LLC
#41 - 2013-06-12 11:17:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexila Quant
Erotica 1 wrote:

I think you're on to something, but I think I have a better idea. Hear me out...

Each agent at every station can only have a dialog up with 1 person at a time. If the agent is busy, you literally have to step in line behind the other pilots. While you are in line, you can chat with your fellow players in line.

Now I know what you are thinking... what if someone in front of you is chatting about nonsense with the agent, right? Well, that's how it is in real life, so why not!

Also, I suggest the agent periodically check his communication device and completely ignore pilots in line. This way it will be more real.

Furthermore, mission agents should be "rightsized." In other words, to save tax isk, a percentage of them- say 25%, should be laid off.

I know, it's a great idea right?!


Awesome post but
Erotica 1 wrote:
[quote=Kara Vix]

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


I thought that new order fad ended already...
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#42 - 2013-06-12 11:18:06 UTC
Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
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.



I think the final mission should be to go grab a beacon of some sort in vfk. Deliver it back to B-N and get paid out.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Kara Vix
Perkone
Caldari State
#43 - 2013-06-12 11:19:18 UTC
Tom Gerard wrote:
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.


This is where people on these forums keep making a mistake. You will never motivate people to leave hi sec, you may motivate them to leave the game but if they don't want to pvp you won't force them too. Its a good thing you people aren't employed by CCP, you would destroy a long lasting game.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#44 - 2013-06-12 11:19:51 UTC
I dunno



This sounds like it could turn into the awful Guild Wars "Find some one to forma party with!" forced BFFE quests

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#45 - 2013-06-12 11:22:20 UTC
Alexila Quant wrote:


I thought that new order fad ended already...


*snerk* like New Order were the first to do what they do



My corp has a very long and proud history of destroying the terminally stupid

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#46 - 2013-06-12 11:26:52 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
Kara Vix wrote:
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


I respect others ideas, when they are not idiotic and self serving, but this endless cycle of trying to destroy hi sec to force people into low or null grows tiring. New Order, lol, what a bunch of muppets.


Each insult results in a fine. I suggest you stop now, find an agent, and offer to pay your fine before the bill gets out of hand.



This, and everything else involving either James315 or Minerbumping, is absolutely the worst role-playing I've ever seen since role-playing even started in 1974. I was there. I've been there. I am here now.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Avon
#47 - 2013-06-12 11:28:30 UTC
Here is the problem with this idea:

Probably the vast majority of any ISK any player currently possesses came, at some point, from someone killing an NPC.

The impact of the proposed change would not be limited to the people who run missions.

Not well thought through.

Nil pois
Tom Gerard
Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
#48 - 2013-06-12 11:44:06 UTC
Avon wrote:
Here is the problem with this idea:

Probably the vast majority of any ISK any player currently possesses came, at some point, from someone killing an NPC.

The impact of the proposed change would not be limited to the people who run missions.

Not well thought through.

Nil pois


I like the idea of hurting LOTS of people.

Now with 100% less Troll.
Avon
#49 - 2013-06-12 11:50:51 UTC
Tom Gerard wrote:


I like the idea of hurting LOTS of people.



Fine, in that case let's strip everyone's wallets and assets and start again.
I'd go with that.
Ravnik
Infinate Horizon
#50 - 2013-06-12 11:57:17 UTC
Avon wrote:
Tom Gerard wrote:


I like the idea of hurting LOTS of people.



Fine, in that case let's strip everyone's wallets and assets and start again.
I'd go with that.


I dont need my wallet stripped..im doing a pretty good job of that on my own Lol

The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long - and you have burned so very, very brightly..........
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#51 - 2013-06-12 12:26:34 UTC
Kara Vix wrote:
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


I respect others ideas, when they are not idiotic and self serving, but this endless cycle of trying to destroy hi sec to force people into low or null grows tiring. New Order, lol, what a bunch of muppets.


A kitten dies every time someone suggest the most idiotic thing a person can say on these forums (which is saying something). ie that tired "you just want to force me to do something" meme.

CCP didn't change the way ICE worked to get people out of high sec, likewise I don't see how this idea is meant to force anyone to do anything (other than move around high sec a bit).

The ICE change is good because it tears people out of that comfort zone and makes people compete more directly, which is really what the game is about, not sitting back comfortably farming npc content spewing isk and materials into the game non-stop.

On of the most annoying ironies of this game's community is the double standard of it's high sec component. Most of you high sec types think of null sec as this safe blue donut ruled by unthinking/unfeeling oligarchs (the reality is actually the opposite of that). and you think that while running the same stagnant missions for the same stagnant agents or mining the same stagnant rocks in the same stagnant systems over and over and over again.

So no, no one wants you to have to move out of high, it would be nice if you had to move around IN High.....
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#52 - 2013-06-12 12:30:09 UTC
Andski wrote:
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


So what happens when a moon already has an enemy POS on it and you find out that it now has valuable minerals? Do you fight them for it?

At what point is it worth fighting over a moon? Apparently 2 years is too long, since that just gives nullsec empires time to stagnate and fall apart from lack of any direction, or reinforce themselves with many structures and endless supplies of supercapitals. You claim that three months isn't enough time to make it worthwhile. Somewhere in the middle is a sweet spot where it becomes worthwhile to harass the existing owners of lower value moons to improve the value of the minerals you've extracted yourself, and challenge the ownership of more valuable moons to inflate your own coffers.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#53 - 2013-06-12 12:31:12 UTC
Some responses here have gotten downright mean. Here's some reasoning:

If you can limit the resource, the resource becomes more valuable. Hisec mission runners aren't getting any special reward for what they do, besides injecting isk/lp into the economy. We don't get officer/pirate drops. We don't get good bounties. Even our salvage generally sucks.

But hisec missions are also some of the most boring, repetitive, and downright soul-destroying activities that this game has.

CCP's choices have always been to either 'liven up' missions, or ignore them. A change as drastic as I've proposed, where missions become yet another fallible resource in this game, does a lot of mission runners. It makes our payout more effective. It makes our salvage more expensive. It destroys the mission hubs where our gear can't sell above dime because it's flooded with other players.

It also would give us more voice, because as another poster said, how much of our economy's isk was brought into the game by us, the oft-ignored and devalued mission runner.

We blow up ships every day. CCP loves for people to blow stuff up. So how come miners' are more important than mission runners in CCP's eyes?

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#54 - 2013-06-12 12:37:21 UTC
I Love Boobies wrote:
You know... there is a section for these kinds of threads. It's called Features & Ideas Discussions.



That's generally my first indicator of a troll thread; new gameplay idea out of the suggested forum for new gameplay ideas.

Also, lets make painful gameplay mechanics (like missioning) more painful, and introduce lines for stuff. If we're real lucky we can take any shred of 'fun' out of a 'game.' You know; for the sake of fairness. Do you folk work at the DMV?


+1 for I love boobies
Onomerous
Negative-Impact
Sedition.
#55 - 2013-06-12 12:43:33 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:

I think you're on to something, but I think I have a better idea. Hear me out...

Each agent at every station can only have a dialog up with 1 person at a time. If the agent is busy, you literally have to step in line behind the other pilots. While you are in line, you can chat with your fellow players in line.

Now I know what you are thinking... what if someone in front of you is chatting about nonsense with the agent, right? Well, that's how it is in real life, so why not!

Also, I suggest the agent periodically check his communication device and completely ignore pilots in line. This way it will be more real.

Furthermore, mission agents should be "rightsized." In other words, to save tax isk, a percentage of them- say 25%, should be laid off.

I know, it's a great idea right?!


And to add: when a pilot goes to get a mission, the pilot and the agent get a random number. If the pilot's number is higher than 2xagent's number, he gets a mission. If not, the pilot gets blown up and podded!! Let's add some real excitement to it!!
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#56 - 2013-06-12 12:51:51 UTC
Amanda Chelian wrote:
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.


do feel free to tell us where all of the moons are

before you to open up dotlan, the moon compositions there are lies

oh and don't try scanning on the test server, it's shuffled there

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#57 - 2013-06-12 12:56:38 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
So what happens when a moon already has an enemy POS on it and you find out that it now has valuable minerals? Do you fight them for it?

At what point is it worth fighting over a moon? Apparently 2 years is too long, since that just gives nullsec empires time to stagnate and fall apart from lack of any direction, or reinforce themselves with many structures and endless supplies of supercapitals. You claim that three months isn't enough time to make it worthwhile. Somewhere in the middle is a sweet spot where it becomes worthwhile to harass the existing owners of lower value moons to improve the value of the minerals you've extracted yourself, and challenge the ownership of more valuable moons to inflate your own coffers.


So your belief is that instead of having large nullsec empires invade regions to take moons, they're better off throwing isk at their members to scan their space every so often and tower moons with valuable minerals spawning on them?

So much for moons as conflict drivers, then~

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#58 - 2013-06-12 13:13:47 UTC
Ruze wrote:


We blow up ships every day. CCP loves for people to blow stuff up. So how come miners' are more important than mission runners in CCP's eyes?


A) You arent, you are both bottom-feeders in the EVE foodchain to them

B) They love PVP, not PVE

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#59 - 2013-06-12 13:27:13 UTC
Weeell… it's an old idea, but still a pretty good one.

You'd probably want a bit more granularity than “25 every hour” (or whatever). Simply make them queue up at, say, one every minute — first come, first serve (with the standard option of skipping over one with a 4h timer). Agents that are never used will end up with thousands queued up, whereas hub agents will constantly be dry unless your timing is very lucky.

It's that second part that is really needed to make it work: that the queue builds up (almost) so that you can find a treasure-trove of untapped agent resources if you look around a bit.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#60 - 2013-06-12 13:30:35 UTC
... thinks that since crazy ideas are the "nouveau chic", missions should be accessed based on SENIORITY of characters' (chronological) age... waits for howling and hissyfits from the Disney kids...




"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )