These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Any hope to see mission running re-vitalized?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2013-08-30 08:25:31 UTC
The new notes regarding the changes to the Marauder classes are interesting. For the last year I have been grinding missions while skilling up. What I have found is that the loot seems to go down in value, the chances of getting faction drops in high sec is almost at 0. There are no benifits to grinding standings, and the epic arcs are a far cry from epic and haven't been touched since about 06.
While I find the new ideas are grand, is there any way that the mission runners of EVE can get some luv? Someone poorly suggested it's a '"Risk = Reward " concept. That ; all high sec should amount to less income based on the risk. If that's the philosophy...then why is it less risky to run an incursion than to solo a Lvl 4. Keep in mind the incursion pays a great deal more.
If we are being forced into rolls that we don't wish to play; why not just mine , and not worry about skilling up. Just mine and that's all there is to it. If you want to PVP go to null or low. Don't have the preditors up in high to eat shiney ships.
Forgive me if I'm out of line, but if this is a sandbox. Why is there so much effort on behalf of CCP nerfing missions and mission content to force people into other areas?
William Walker
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#2 - 2013-08-30 08:29:16 UTC
Nerf incursions?
Jam Kirk wrote:
Don't have the preditors up in high to eat shiney ships.

Jam Kirk wrote:
Forgive me if I'm out of line, but if this is a sandbox.

It is a sandbox. Shiny ships will always be eaten.

ヽ(⌒∇⌒)ﾉ へ(゜∇、°)へ (◕‿◕✿)
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2013-08-30 08:32:10 UTC
Because it's a sandbox.

It's not about "play however you want, solo".
It's about "play however you want, but with everybody else".

Missions don't really support that, unless you get scanned down and ninja salvaged or blown up.

But... tbh... i have started to understand that missions could use some love too.
No matter what, it's a part of the game

Nonetheless... please stop using the sandbox argument. It doesn't work that way.
Sandboxes don't center around the needs of individuals,
they work because of the interaction between players
and it doesn't matter if you want this interaction to happen or not.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#4 - 2013-08-30 08:35:36 UTC
My idea is to remove level 4s from low sec and buff low sec missions to give better rewards as follows;

Low sec level 1 = High sec level 2
Low sec level 2 = High sec level 3
Low sec level 3 = High sec level 4

This will give new players a choice. They can either stay in high sec and skill up a badly trained BS to run level 4s, or they can take their BC into low sec and get the same reward running level 3s. They will be able to cover the cost of a lost ship with just a few missions so the risk is more appealing and they will get into fights and find the game a lot more enjoyable, plus it will bring more targets into lowsec for gankers so there will be more enjoyable gameplay for all.

Oh god.
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2013-08-30 08:43:25 UTC
Firstly : Online Sandbox=An open world is a type of video game level design where a player can roam freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in choosing how or when to approach objectives. Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.

I do howerver like the idea of making low sec missions work better. Maybe better drops also? Some attention needs to be on bringing the mission runner back into the game though in any case.
Ruskarn Andedare
Lion Investments
#6 - 2013-08-30 08:50:20 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
My idea is to remove level 4s from low sec and buff low sec missions to give better rewards as follows;

Low sec level 1 = High sec level 2
Low sec level 2 = High sec level 3
Low sec level 3 = High sec level 4

This will give new players a choice. They can either stay in high sec and skill up a badly trained BS to run level 4s, or they can take their BC into low sec and get the same reward running level 3s. They will be able to cover the cost of a lost ship with just a few missions so the risk is more appealing and they will get into fights and find the game a lot more enjoyable, plus it will bring more targets into lowsec for gankers so there will be more enjoyable gameplay for all.



Except the grind time for most level 3 and 4 missions is so long that doing them in lowsec would be very unappealing to most mission runners especially sitting in lowsec in a PvE optimised ship.

What we need for mission runners in lowsec is missions that are better tailored to lowsec so that players will fly them in PvP ships and then they won't feel as much of a need to dock up as soon as another pilot enters the system.

Some of the FW missions are already like that but overall they're few and far between.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2013-08-30 08:52:37 UTC
Jam Kirk wrote:
Firstly : Online Sandbox=An open world is a type of video game level design where a player can roam freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in choosing how or when to approach objectives. Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.

I do howerver like the idea of making low sec missions work better. Maybe better drops also? Some attention needs to be on bringing the mission runner back into the game though in any case.

You forgot the most important words: "as long as other players let you"
Lipbite
Express Hauler
#8 - 2013-08-30 08:54:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Lipbite
Jam Kirk wrote:
Why is there so much effort on behalf of CCP nerfing missions and mission content to force people into other areas?


It's sabotage, they want Star Citizen to be a successful game.
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2013-08-30 08:56:22 UTC
I think the matter of low sec missioning is a little off topic on the basis of this thread. I was wondering more about the massive amount of time and developement spent grinding for standings and running missions. There is a HUGE decrease in worth while results for the effort. That and no new anything on the mission front since it's primary inception!
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#10 - 2013-08-30 08:56:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Riot Girl
Ruskarn Andedare wrote:
Except the grind time for most level 3 and 4 missions is so long that doing them in lowsec would be very unappealing to most mission runners especially sitting in lowsec in a PvE optimised ship.

What we need for mission runners in lowsec is missions that are better tailored to lowsec so that players will fly them in PvP ships and then they won't feel as much of a need to dock up as soon as another pilot enters the system.

Some of the FW missions are already like that but overall they're few and far between.


I guess that's where mission runners will have to use their brains to come up with a fit and a playstyle that suits their needs.

Oh god.
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-08-30 08:57:48 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
Jam Kirk wrote:
Firstly : Online Sandbox=An open world is a type of video game level design where a player can roam freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in choosing how or when to approach objectives. Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.

I do howerver like the idea of making low sec missions work better. Maybe better drops also? Some attention needs to be on bringing the mission runner back into the game though in any case.

You forgot the most important words: "as long as other players let you"



I just looked up the definition. I didn't bend it to fit an agenda
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2013-08-30 09:01:44 UTC
Jam Kirk wrote:
I think the matter of low sec missioning is a little off topic on the basis of this thread. I was wondering more about the massive amount of time and developement spent grinding for standings and running missions. There is a HUGE decrease in worth while results for the effort. That and no new anything on the mission front since it's primary inception!



They did change the AI enough so that low skilled players loose more drones and lowby ships. So the end result was...More expence, less attractive to new players, oh yeah; less rewards.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2013-08-30 09:02:20 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
My idea is to remove level 4s from low sec and buff low sec missions to give better rewards as follows;

Low sec level 1 = High sec level 2
Low sec level 2 = High sec level 3
Low sec level 3 = High sec level 4

This will give new players a choice. They can either stay in high sec and skill up a badly trained BS to run level 4s, or they can take their BC into low sec and get the same reward running level 3s. They will be able to cover the cost of a lost ship with just a few missions so the risk is more appealing and they will get into fights and find the game a lot more enjoyable, plus it will bring more targets into lowsec for gankers so there will be more enjoyable gameplay for all.

No.
CCP has proven time and again that throwing more money at people doesn't help.
You have the wrong perspective.

The issue is the players. A big part of the problem are the griefers (to quote Tippia)
who sit in rookiechats and -systems telling everybody that they shoudln't ever go to low,
because it's a deathtrap.

They tell them to run missions or mine for isk,
as if playing solo right from the start was a good idea.

Players' behaviour can be be steered best right from the beginning,
and these people do exactly that, with bad consequences for the whole population.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2013-08-30 09:04:34 UTC
Jam Kirk wrote:
Solstice Project wrote:
Jam Kirk wrote:
Firstly : Online Sandbox=An open world is a type of video game level design where a player can roam freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in choosing how or when to approach objectives. Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.

I do howerver like the idea of making low sec missions work better. Maybe better drops also? Some attention needs to be on bringing the mission runner back into the game though in any case.

You forgot the most important words: "as long as other players let you"



I just looked up the definition. I didn't bend it to fit an agenda

A carebear must have written that definition...
Or the writer mistakes single player open world games with true sandboxes.
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2013-08-30 09:06:34 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
My idea is to remove level 4s from low sec and buff low sec missions to give better rewards as follows;

Low sec level 1 = High sec level 2
Low sec level 2 = High sec level 3
Low sec level 3 = High sec level 4

This will give new players a choice. They can either stay in high sec and skill up a badly trained BS to run level 4s, or they can take their BC into low sec and get the same reward running level 3s. They will be able to cover the cost of a lost ship with just a few missions so the risk is more appealing and they will get into fights and find the game a lot more enjoyable, plus it will bring more targets into lowsec for gankers so there will be more enjoyable gameplay for all.

No.
CCP has proven time and again that throwing more money at people doesn't help.
You have the wrong perspective.

The issue is the players. A big part of the problem are the griefers (to quote Tippia)
who sit in rookiechats and -systems telling everybody that they shoudln't ever go to low,
because it's a deathtrap.

They tell them to run missions or mine for isk,
as if playing solo right from the start was a good idea.

Players' behaviour can be be steered best right from the beginning,
and these people do exactly that, with bad consequences for the whole population.

As a newer player, what exactly do you think a 2011 toon can do to a maxed skill PVP 2006 player?
Czeris
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-08-30 09:10:55 UTC
Jam Kirk please contact me as I think you would be a perfect fit for running lucrative missions in Goonswarm space.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#17 - 2013-08-30 09:11:10 UTC
Yeah, I've seen those people in the rookie channel and NPC corp chats. Still, I think this kind of reward would be too great for many mission runners to ignore.

Oh god.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2013-08-30 09:11:20 UTC
Jam Kirk wrote:
Jam Kirk wrote:
I think the matter of low sec missioning is a little off topic on the basis of this thread. I was wondering more about the massive amount of time and developement spent grinding for standings and running missions. There is a HUGE decrease in worth while results for the effort. That and no new anything on the mission front since it's primary inception!



They did change the AI enough so that low skilled players loose more drones and lowby ships. So the end result was...More expence, less attractive to new players, oh yeah; less rewards.

Maybe there's a point behind that.
Have less new people run stupid missions but instead have them seek player
interaction to make money, aka actually playing the game.

See it from a new guys perspective. The first things many do is playing alone!
Alone! That's ridiculous!
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2013-08-30 09:16:27 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Yeah, I've seen those people in the rookie channel and NPC corp chats. Still, I think this kind of reward would be too great for many mission runners to ignore.

They won't care. Never have so far.
Throwing more money at it changes nothing,
except maybe that more lowsec people will run missions.

This topic got beaten to death and beyond already, Riot.
Jam Kirk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2013-08-30 09:16:47 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
Jam Kirk wrote:
Jam Kirk wrote:
I think the matter of low sec missioning is a little off topic on the basis of this thread. I was wondering more about the massive amount of time and developement spent grinding for standings and running missions. There is a HUGE decrease in worth while results for the effort. That and no new anything on the mission front since it's primary inception!



They did change the AI enough so that low skilled players loose more drones and lowby ships. So the end result was...More expence, less attractive to new players, oh yeah; less rewards.

Maybe there's a point behind that.
Have less new people run stupid missions but instead have them seek player
interaction to make money, aka actually playing the game.

See it from a new guys perspective. The first things many do is playing alone!
Alone! That's ridiculous!

Now you are just trying to make your point. Point made! Without bashing on you for how you want to play the game, I'll refrain. If you'd like to comment more and put people down for the playstyle they want.... Go and start your own thread please and leave this one.
123Next pageLast page