These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Do Level 4 missions pay too much compared to 1 through 3?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#481 - 2013-09-03 21:42:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Baltec come back to reality. Nullsec has the same cure for stupid hisec does. Local chat. An alt account to scout the gate ensures you need not ever die non-consensually. Do me a favor . Go trick out a Deadspace ship and sit in jita. Tell me how safe you feel. Perimeter gate. Go HAM. 5 bil or better.


Local wont get rid of people hunting your t2 fitted raven in null. Please, go find me a t2 fitted raven that was ganked in highsec.

The simple fact is that high sec is a better option for making isk right now.


That can't be helped. Nullsec is as intended a more desolate outer reaches far from the hustle and bustle of civilized space. It has many opportunities that civilized space doesn't but comes with its own unique set of challenges to attain those rewards.

The problem is the game doesn't value those challenges in the way players do and will not support the notion of billion isk nullsec missions versus million isk hisec ones. Nor will it support million isk null sec missions and thousand isk hisec missions.

There is an increase in income opportunity in nullsec. A belt rat offers 1 million plus bounty, a hisec one, maybe 250k. (I haven't killed a hisec BS rat in a long time, can't recall) That right there is 4 times the income for the same exact activity/time spent just by virtue of hunting them there.

I think what most are really arguing is a lack of variety in ways to make income in nullsec do to its rules/limitations.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#482 - 2013-09-03 21:50:22 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Baltec come back to reality. Nullsec has the same cure for stupid hisec does. Local chat. An alt account to scout the gate ensures you need not ever die non-consensually. Do me a favor . Go trick out a Deadspace ship and sit in jita. Tell me how safe you feel. Perimeter gate. Go HAM. 5 bil or better.


Local wont get rid of people hunting your t2 fitted raven in null. Please, go find me a t2 fitted raven that was ganked in highsec.

The simple fact is that high sec is a better option for making isk right now.


That can't be helped. Nullsec is as intended a more desolate outer reaches far from the hustle and bustle of civilized space. It has many opportunities that civilized space doesn't but comes with its own unique set of challenges to attain those rewards.

The problem is the game doesn't value those challenges in the way players do and will not support the notion of billion dollar nullsec missions versus million dollar hisec ones. Nor will it support million dollar null sec missions and thousand dollar hisec missions.

There is an increase in income in nullsec. A belt rat offers 1 million plus bounty, a hisec one, maybe 250k. (I haven't killed a hisec BS rat in a long time, can't recall) That right there is 4 times the income for the same exact activity/time spent just by virtue of hunting them there.


Belt ratting is one of the worst ways go earn isk the rats tank more in null and there are fewer of them.

The problem is the null income has seen years of nerfs made to it but CCP did not do anything to high sec income. This has resulted is todays current imbalance. CCP cannot buff null income without harming the economy so that leaves erfing missions and incursions in high. They have already started this process with the ice changes.

Null sec is not some slumland its ment for building empires.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#483 - 2013-09-03 21:53:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Part of nullsecs reward is the ability to control your own empire/space. Not every reward is ISK based.

And no there are not fewer belt rats than there are in hi sec. You have to work the spawns up just like anywhere else.

Furthermore, there are far fewer people in nullsec and less competition over the rats.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#484 - 2013-09-03 22:00:15 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


Did you read what I said? The calculations use averages of ship losses. Is that not the best way to calculate risk?



Not when the ships are differnet sizes and costs and effectiveness ect. Look at the devblog I linked. At 1st blush it looked like high sec pve loses almost matched null sec pvp loses. Then you realize that the BULK of those high sec pve loses were tech1 frigs in starter areas lol.

just dividing the numbers of ships lost per mission runner is useless unless every single mission runner is running the same ship and fit.
Quote:

How else would you calculate risk? Do you play something your self and say "Well this seems more or less risky than another activity..." If ship losses per hour average can't calculate risk, then I don't know how else you can to make a scientific judgement.

The problem with personal observation (rational or not) is that it is anecdotal which is that it is not scientific and may not even give the true figures. What you see personally may not be the same case for everyone.

I am willing to conceed, but you must prove it with data. Otherwise you are someone who just assumes that what they see is correct for all scenarios. It like pulling numbers out of your butt or go with your gut feeling. It is not the correct way to be making major changes.

To understand what anecdotal evidence is read this and you'll see what is wrong with making statements without enough data:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence


Just quoting the rest of this to demonstrate how you always tend to get off track (usually with an assumption). I'm not making this stuff up, "big" ship losses rarely occur in pve and most PVE losses happen in high sec. Mission running is THE most common pve activity, which makes it a prime candidate for changes, although incursions rank up there as well because incursion runners are a small group shiving a HUGE amount of isk (per capita) into the game.

(Which is why everytime DIN or ISN kill an incursion early, they are actually helping the game no matter how many cursing fits they send me into because I was off for labor day with no damn high sec incursions.....but I digress).

I run missions everyday. EVE's pve is going backwards as it's now 100% perfectly safe if you fly a battleship (MJD means you can't die to npcs under any circumstance except letting your cap dip below MJD activation threshold). The new bastion module for marauders is going to make lvl4s safer still (even if the marauder pilot doesn't use it, he can mount a bastion mod to combat both full room aggro AND suicide ganking).


I know that you (from personal experience) have not experience loss missioning, but that does not mean others experience it.

Even if you are taking information from other people hearsay, that is still anecdotal evidence.

Its like going outside during a cold day and saying "Hrm... Global warming doesn't seem to exist because its cold out side."

If that were true, I could simply counter your argument saying... I know people who have lost ships during missions.

I am seeing in order to prove this one another we need the data of how many ships are lost during mission running and how many ships are lost during null sec income activities. Actually, it would be probaly better to not just count ship losses but the actual average of total ships amount lost because people in FW lose a good of frigates but yet still have a lower loss than someone who says loses a CNR.

If you read that article I posted, you would see why coming to decisions based on personal observation is suspect. Humans do it, but it comes to the wrong conclusion.

Unless, you can prove with data that on average null sec losses are greater for the isk earned, then you are just pulling stuff out of your butt and using gut instinct to come to a decision that you have no proof for other than what you have personally experienced.

There is a whole world beyond your personal experience. I mean I see ship losses on the map in mission hubs all the time... I can't say for certain whether or not those losses are mission runners. I don't have the data for that.

Neither do you so stop coming to this conclusions without something to back it up other than your personal experience.

And Tippia. I'm still waiting for that webpage citing CCP data with last months data on ships losses during missions compared to their income compared to people running null sec activities (not activily seeking pvp) and their losses and income.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#485 - 2013-09-03 22:06:20 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Part of nullsecs reward is the ability to control your own empire/space. Not every reward is ISK based.

And no there are not fewer belt rats than there are in hi sec. You have to work the spawns up just like anywhere else.

Furthermore, there are far fewer people in nullsec and less competition over the rats.


You get three battleships in a spawn vs how many in level 4s?

As for competitition, you can fit 10 in a null system. Any more and you will have ques forming for the next anom.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#486 - 2013-09-03 22:07:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
baltec1 wrote:
They have already started this process with the ice changes.


I hate to say this, but you earn more isk per hour ice mining than regular mining now unlike before the patch. Mostly this has to do with current prices, so if you mine ice, you make much more now than you would before the patch change.

Before the patch prices were 100K per unit of white glaze. Now its 200K and now you mine twice as fast.

You do the math.

If you happen to be in a system with 3 ice belts, you usually aren't hard up to find ice.

Actually, I know people who fly between 2 belt and 3 belt systems so that they always have ice.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#487 - 2013-09-03 22:12:26 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
They have already started this process with the ice changes.


I hate to say this, but you earn more isk per hour ice mining than regular mining now unlike before the patch. Mostly this has to do with current prices, so if you mine ice, you make much more now than you would before the patch change.

Before the patch prices were 100K per unit. Now its 200K and now you mine twice as fast.

You do the math.

If you happen to be in a system with 3 ice belts, you usually aren't hard up to find ice.

Actually, I know people who fly between 2 belt and 3 belt systems so that they always have ice.


It is impossible for high sec to meet the market demand for ice.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#488 - 2013-09-03 22:28:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Part of nullsecs reward is the ability to control your own empire/space. Not every reward is ISK based.

And no there are not fewer belt rats than there are in hi sec. You have to work the spawns up just like anywhere else.

Furthermore, there are far fewer people in nullsec and less competition over the rats.


You get three battleships in a spawn vs how many in level 4s?

As for competitition, you can fit 10 in a null system. Any more and you will have ques forming for the next anom.


Apples and oranges. Ratting and missions are two different income opportunities.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#489 - 2013-09-03 22:28:45 UTC
I have removed some off topic posts. Please keep it on topic and civil. Thank you.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#490 - 2013-09-03 22:29:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
They have already started this process with the ice changes.


I hate to say this, but you earn more isk per hour ice mining than regular mining now unlike before the patch. Mostly this has to do with current prices, so if you mine ice, you make much more now than you would before the patch change.

Before the patch prices were 100K per unit. Now its 200K and now you mine twice as fast.

You do the math.

If you happen to be in a system with 3 ice belts, you usually aren't hard up to find ice.

Actually, I know people who fly between 2 belt and 3 belt systems so that they always have ice.


It is impossible for high sec to meet the market demand for ice.


True, but high sec is making more money now than before because of supply and demand.

They can't meet the demand so the price doubled meaning they now only have to work in half as much time as they did before.

And this is doubled again because ice mining times were reduced by half after the patch.

So people who mined 8 hours a day now only have to work 2 to make the same amount of income. (Reduce 8 by half because double the white glaze prices and again by another half because of the reduction in mining time).

Which means people are earning quite a bit more if they can mine even a fraction of the amount of time before which many are.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#491 - 2013-09-03 22:36:37 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:


True, but high sec is making more money now than before because of supply and demand.

They can't meet the demand so the price doubled meaning they now only have to work in half as much time as they did before.

And this is doubled again because ice mining times were reduced by half after the patch.

So people who mined 8 hours a day now only have to work 2 to make the same amount of income. (Reduce 8 by half because double the white glaze prices and again by another half because of the reduction in mining time).

Which means people are earning quite a bit more if they can mine even a fraction of the amount of time before which many are.


Only they cant mine 8 hours a day in high sec due to the spawn mechanics.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#492 - 2013-09-03 22:39:31 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:


Apples and oranges. Ratting and missions are two different income opportunities.


Anoms are our variation of missions in sov null.

What is the point in owning and defending an empire in null if the best option is to make our isk outside of it in high sec? This is the problem, high sec offers too much for little effort or risk.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#493 - 2013-09-03 22:44:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


True, but high sec is making more money now than before because of supply and demand.

They can't meet the demand so the price doubled meaning they now only have to work in half as much time as they did before.

And this is doubled again because ice mining times were reduced by half after the patch.

So people who mined 8 hours a day now only have to work 2 to make the same amount of income. (Reduce 8 by half because double the white glaze prices and again by another half because of the reduction in mining time).

Which means people are earning quite a bit more if they can mine even a fraction of the amount of time before which many are.


Only they cant mine 8 hours a day in high sec due to the spawn mechanics.


I didn't say they mined 8 hours a day currently. It was before they patch that many people did this.

I simply said the current situations has been buffed so you only have to mine 2 hours instead of 8 and get the same amount of income.

And its possible to mine more than 2 hours easily so incomes for individual miners has gone up.

But if we are talking about averages... I'll be honest and tell you I don't know, but if I got paid twice as much and mined it twice as fast, then I would consider the patch to be a buff.

The only people who are complaining about it are the people who wanted to watch netflix and ice mine.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#494 - 2013-09-03 22:55:09 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
At this point I will again point out that level 4 missions offer around the same level of income as null sec.



Running around in a shiffit cruisers in nullsec is no more riskier than a multi billion dollar blingship in hisec. I don't see the issue. Assuming of course this statement is even close to true. Risk versus reward is not an absolute. You are not taking more risk just by the virtue of being in nullsec. Its all situation dependent.


What nullsec wants to do is convince CCP that they must be making 50-100 times the income of hisec just by virtue of the little red sec number.


So you dock up when a neut enters local in high sec? You get hotdrops? You can be kicked out of you station system?


Sorry but high sec is damn near perfect safety and null if far from that. The issue is that there is no reason to take on the much higher risks of low and null while level 4s offer around the same income with near perfect safsty.


That's horse ****, high sec is not perfect safety, you've obviously never been wardecced. Take a look at the map most days more people die in highsec than in low or null. I've lived in null and if you are in the right corp and blue to lots of people, you can farm isk all day long. It's safer than highsec.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#495 - 2013-09-03 22:58:52 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

Of course you can't because any review of the things I linked will demonstrate that what I'm saying is true: EVe has too many faucets, not enough sinks and missions are a big huge slice of that because there are so many mission runners. The game would benefit from more risk in pve (namely missions but also other content like anomalies and complexes) because as it is now pve doesn't kill big ships very often and big ships (stuff with material produced in game as they are) blowing up if good for everyone.


ME losing that navy BS was not good for ME. Thats will most likely be his argument.

In my case, it did make me learn something so it was still somewhat good.


Yea, but then you have some sense lol. People with good sense can understand that sometimes bad things happening to me (in a game) can be good for the game overall. It doesn't mean I didn't rage when I autopilted that Jf to jita then fell asleep, totally forgetting about that pesky war-dec......

But the destuction of that JF and the 400mil in cargo that popped was good for someone, and thus good for the game overall.

Look at this Caliph guy defending mindless missions when what I suggest is better, more fun missions (and copmplexes, and anoms) that incidientally kill more ships than die now. Nothing wrong with maintaining the status quo when it's good but a sucky status quo needs to go.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#496 - 2013-09-03 23:04:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
I've never once disagreed with making missions more interactive or even challenging. What I do disagree with, Jenn, is arbitrarily reducing hisec income with nothing but gut feelings and bias as the evidence for doing such.

Change is only good when it improves the lives of everyone. Change for the sake of change is almost always bad.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#497 - 2013-09-03 23:09:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
.......................
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#498 - 2013-09-03 23:12:14 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
At this point I will again point out that level 4 missions offer around the same level of income as null sec.



Running around in a shiffit cruisers in nullsec is no more riskier than a multi billion dollar blingship in hisec. I don't see the issue. Assuming of course this statement is even close to true. Risk versus reward is not an absolute. You are not taking more risk just by the virtue of being in nullsec. Its all situation dependent.


What nullsec wants to do is convince CCP that they must be making 50-100 times the income of hisec just by virtue of the little red sec number.


So you dock up when a neut enters local in high sec? You get hotdrops? You can be kicked out of you station system?


Sorry but high sec is damn near perfect safety and null if far from that. The issue is that there is no reason to take on the much higher risks of low and null while level 4s offer around the same income with near perfect safsty.


That's horse ****, high sec is not perfect safety, you've obviously never been wardecced. Take a look at the map most days more people die in highsec than in low or null. I've lived in null and if you are in the right corp and blue to lots of people, you can farm isk all day long. It's safer than highsec.


you never see the isk/hr or total isk earned comparisons presented in population density factors either ....
not that i'm claiming that certain people deliberately misrepresent any information they present of course

people presenting data that only supports their point of view ..... inconceivable
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#499 - 2013-09-03 23:14:21 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
At this point I will again point out that level 4 missions offer around the same level of income as null sec.



Running around in a shiffit cruisers in nullsec is no more riskier than a multi billion dollar blingship in hisec. I don't see the issue. Assuming of course this statement is even close to true. Risk versus reward is not an absolute. You are not taking more risk just by the virtue of being in nullsec. Its all situation dependent.


What nullsec wants to do is convince CCP that they must be making 50-100 times the income of hisec just by virtue of the little red sec number.


So you dock up when a neut enters local in high sec? You get hotdrops? You can be kicked out of you station system?


Sorry but high sec is damn near perfect safety and null if far from that. The issue is that there is no reason to take on the much higher risks of low and null while level 4s offer around the same income with near perfect safsty.


That's horse ****, high sec is not perfect safety, you've obviously never been wardecced. Take a look at the map most days more people die in highsec than in low or null. I've lived in null and if you are in the right corp and blue to lots of people, you can farm isk all day long. It's safer than highsec.


you never see the isk/hr or total isk earned comparisons presented in population density factors either ....
not that i'm claiming that certain people deliberately misrepresent any information they present of course

people presenting data that only supports their point of view ..... inconceivable


Yeah, so when are you going to stop...

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
#500 - 2013-09-03 23:25:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
At this point I will again point out that level 4 missions offer around the same level of income as null sec.


Easy solution: run L4 missions in nullsec. You can easily break 250mil/hr if you don't waste your time salvaging.