These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Do missions need a revamp?

First post
Author
dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-09-04 13:52:27 UTC
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything... they need to make harder missions that actually is challenging.

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.

Loyal Follower
Doomheim
#22 - 2013-09-04 14:01:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Loyal Follower
dexington wrote:
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything... they need to make harder missions that actually is challenging.


It does not have to be that way (i am referring to your first sentence)! That's why instead of throwing the ball to the Designers with generalities that all we could argue/agree, you could describe in detail a new mission that is an example of what you have in mind.
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2013-09-04 14:03:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Niena Nuamzzar
dexington wrote:
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything...

This is exactly why better AI is needed so one is no longer able to play alone with his brain elsewhere.
Loyal Follower
Doomheim
#24 - 2013-09-04 14:07:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Loyal Follower
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:
dexington wrote:
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything...

This is exactly why better AI is needed so one is no longer able to play alone with his brain elsewhere.


It is needed. Still, people lose ships in at least some level 4s if they are careless. Not to mention the drones loosing after the changes. So they have made steps to that direction.
ExcalibursTemplar
CANZUK
#25 - 2013-09-04 14:09:14 UTC
dexington wrote:
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything... they need to make harder missions that actually is challenging.


CCP moved those missions to lowsec.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#26 - 2013-09-04 14:29:41 UTC
It will be interesting to see what ccp does.

Just some personal observations

-I find missions to be awfully tedious/grindy, even when cherry picking blitzable ones. The ones that make you retrieve an item just plain sucks and a with those were put in a separate category (like the split between security and courier missions, you could have "security" missions and "retrieval/bounty hunter" missions).

-The UI additions of the past (where you have the name of the mission and warp/docking/ set destination buttons" was a GREAT addition and made dual boxing missions much less of a hassle.

-always having to dock to talk to an agent is tedious (in a world of changeable clones what good is a face to face meeting lol?).

-It's ok if a mission makes you jump a gate or several gates, but missions outside of the agent system should offer a higher reward. Incursions and wormhole PVe don't make you leave system and if a null anomaly makes you leave system, it's for an escalation that could earn you billions (or nothing) lol. It would be nice to be able to choose to mission in one system.

-The randomness can be a plus or minus. on the plus side it keeps people from farming the best missions. On the minus side it forces you to change fits or ships all the time (or forces you to use a general onmi tank fit which my be vulnerable to some missions and/or ganking). I like to tinker with fits when I want to, I don't like being forced into it. Incursions, wormholes and anomalies/exploration don't force fit changes NEAR as much as the current missions do while also paying more.

-I love Cipher's term "Bruce Lee fight" lol. That just plain sucks and needs to go, fewer but stronger NPCs that act like player. If it's a rattlesnake it should deploy drones eetc etc.

-Wild out of left field idea time (feel free to not like this one :) ). One of the things I like about Anomalies is the chance escalations, it kinda makes it feel like gambling and that pop up is exciting lol.

Give high sec lvl 3 and 4 missions a SMALL chance to escalate to a DED 1/10, 2/10 or 3/10 of whatever pirate faction the originating mission is from.

Balance points: high sec missions could only escalate to low sec (never null, never high) and the plex must be completable by a frigate or destroyer, (cruiser at most). This not only exposes high sec mission runners to low sec and the wider game, it lets them go to low sec in cheap and safer ships (I imagine the Venture would be popular for this) that can avi if they choose to do them, at all. Or the mission runner could ignore the escalation or perhaps sell it in some kind of market mechanism.

Low and null lvl 3 and 4 should have the same small chance under this idea, with those small ship DED plexes being also in low or null.

I'm just glad to see a dev post about PVE lol
Loyal Follower
Doomheim
#27 - 2013-09-04 14:53:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Loyal Follower
Jenn aSide wrote:
It will be interesting to see what ccp does.

Just some personal observations

-I find missions to be awfully tedious/grindy, even when cherry picking blitzable ones. The ones that make you retrieve an item just plain sucks and a with those were put in a separate category (like the split between security and courier missions, you could have "security" missions and "retrieval/bounty hunter" missions).

-The UI additions of the past (where you have the name of the mission and warp/docking/ set destination buttons" was a GREAT addition and made dual boxing missions much less of a hassle.

-always having to dock to talk to an agent is tedious (in a world of changeable clones what good is a face to face meeting lol?).

-It's ok if a mission makes you jump a gate or several gates, but missions outside of the agent system should offer a higher reward. Incursions and wormhole PVe don't make you leave system and if a null anomaly makes you leave system, it's for an escalation that could earn you billions (or nothing) lol. It would be nice to be able to choose to mission in one system.

-The randomness can be a plus or minus. on the plus side it keeps people from farming the best missions. On the minus side it forces you to change fits or ships all the time (or forces you to use a general onmi tank fit which my be vulnerable to some missions and/or ganking). I like to tinker with fits when I want to, I don't like being forced into it. Incursions, wormholes and anomalies/exploration don't force fit changes NEAR as much as the current missions do while also paying more.

-I love Cipher's term "Bruce Lee fight" lol. That just plain sucks and needs to go, fewer but stronger NPCs that act like player. If it's a rattlesnake it should deploy drones eetc etc.

-Wild out of left field idea time (feel free to not like this one :) ). One of the things I like about Anomalies is the chance escalations, it kinda makes it feel like gambling and that pop up is exciting lol.

Give high sec lvl 3 and 4 missions a SMALL chance to escalate to a DED 1/10, 2/10 or 3/10 of whatever pirate faction the originating mission is from.

Balance points: high sec missions could only escalate to low sec (never null, never high) and the plex must be completable by a frigate or destroyer, (cruiser at most). This not only exposes high sec mission runners to low sec and the wider game, it lets them go to low sec in cheap and safer ships (I imagine the Venture would be popular for this) that can avi if they choose to do them, at all. Or the mission runner could ignore the escalation or perhaps sell it in some kind of market mechanism.

Low and null lvl 3 and 4 should have the same small chance under this idea, with those small ship DED plexes being also in low or null.

I'm just glad to see a dev post about PVE lol



I agree with most of your post. I believe we could categorize very roughly players as far as the missions concerned to 2 major categories. Those that do them to fund other activities and those, who we can call for the post's sake pure PVErs.The first like/need the predictability and the second at least don't like it. Personally i belong to the second. So the second i believe would like to see fluctuation in mechanics, opponents (rats), maybe triggers, loot, rewards and of course sort/quantity of missions, ie more missions.

At the moment the current system mainly satisfies the first kind. Cosmos and epic arcs alleviate the situation for the second but up to a point. Especially Cosmos and the value of Cosmos items need to be further looked but this is only one side. So in order to have both sorts of players satisfied, i suggested the introduction of more missions (and some different AI up to point of course for those only new introduced missions) and to aid to that situation i proposed players' missions suggestions. It is not easy to design and balance appropriately a new mission and it takes a lot of resources from CCP i can understand that, but i would like too to have a response from Dev, mission designer if possible would be better to this proposal. If it is positive, some people, including myself i believe will take the time and effort to detail describe at least one level 4 and its mechanics to be used as raw material for the benefit of all, but if not it would be a waste of our time and effort.


Thanks.
Fanatic Row
Neo T.E.C.H.
#28 - 2013-09-04 15:02:27 UTC
CCP Affinity wrote:
Yes they do :) and it is on our to-do list.. but the content revamp is going to be a long process.
Instead of using resources to revamp and create new missions; have you considered releasing some kind of Steam Workshop for EVE missions, to the playerbase instead? Big smile
Mukuro Gravedigger
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2013-09-04 15:15:31 UTC
A few ideas that may or may not be acceptable to mission runners.

The agent has a limited number of missions to hand out per hour to per day. Whereas I can see players quickly farming an agent dry, perhaps a limit towards a particular player could be added. Create a scenario where these agents are not just money machines but part of a larger whole. So if this particular agent does not have a mission, "At the moment, it is pretty quiet around here. But (another agent's name) located (particular station) might have something for you." And if the player does follow up with the advice, perhaps a subtle increase in rewards could be offered. "Thank you for the help (pilot's name) - here is a bit extra for your efforts."

Spread the players around instead of just constantly farming out of one station with one agent.

Another idea was why our status towards an enemy is never used during a mission (creation). Over the years of toiling away at rocks, the Angel Cartel have gotten quite annoyed towards me (-10 status). Say I decided to run a combat mission - Angel Extravagance. Warp into the mission area, a pop-up message, "Our spies within (corporation's name I accepted the mission from) told us you were sent for us and you now fell into our trap!" And instead of your typical "Mission Survival Guide" set-up with rats, there are neutralizers, scramblers, and other wicked rats of that faction making sure to make live miserable for me by doing their damnedest to destroy my ship. Also, instead of the rats being stupid, "Hey, did Charlie over there just blow up?" "Think so... anyway, as I was saying...", make them heavily aggressive based upon how bad our status is towards them.

And of course this should be a random chance and not every mission versus a highly negative status pirate faction should bring the cavalry each and every time.

Just move players around and drop them into situations where a simple cake walk is suddenly a potential death trap.
Siam Khan
Quebec's Underdog League
Quebec United Legions
#30 - 2013-09-04 15:16:29 UTC
yes it need a revemp..

idea..



1. option so you don t get x or y faction mission if the player only wish to do mission vs pirate or neutral like drone should have a option...



2. have mission from lvl 1 to 5 in each station..so you can focus at doing multiple stuff...like planatary explotation, playing the market, mining..and other going on a pve mission should not make you travel across the galaxie for you to play...



3. MORE MISSION 10 year old game should have build more mission.



4. LP Store option to get item w out the items like tag.. maybe also you could buy LP w isk.. don t care if it generate more item on the market.



5. Salvage remove mission event were you get att by npc if you show up w a salvager..what is the idea here mission are already long no need to fool ppl around during already booring salvage operation



6. make mission w different difficulty lvl but in a way you can choose to run them like that..maybe provide more lp or isk for them...ei: LVL 1 mission should have mode easy medium hard in this way you could run LVL 1 mission for fun and have some good isk LP for them..but that require more mission to start with.



7. did i say MORE MISSION



that is a start...
Novah Soul
#31 - 2013-09-04 15:19:53 UTC
Fanatic Row wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
Yes they do :) and it is on our to-do list.. but the content revamp is going to be a long process.
Instead of using resources to revamp and create new missions; have you considered releasing some kind of Steam Workshop for EVE missions, to the playerbase instead? Big smile

Ha that would be interesting. With the general tendency to troll from the eve playerbase, I could see missions that range from unsoloable sluggers that give almost no reward, to ones with a single frigate that pay better then some lvl 4s now. =P

A man is known by the quality of his friends. - Lex Luthor

Loyal Follower
Doomheim
#32 - 2013-09-04 15:22:40 UTC
Novah Soul wrote:
Fanatic Row wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
Yes they do :) and it is on our to-do list.. but the content revamp is going to be a long process.
Instead of using resources to revamp and create new missions; have you considered releasing some kind of Steam Workshop for EVE missions, to the playerbase instead? Big smile

Ha that would be interesting. With the general tendency to troll from the eve playerbase, I could see missions that range from unsoloable sluggers that give almost no reward, to ones with a single frigate that pay better then some lvl 4s now. =P



That's why player's designs are only suggestions and are passed to Devs/Designers for quality/sanity control.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#33 - 2013-09-04 15:35:53 UTC
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:
dexington wrote:
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything...

This is exactly why better AI is needed so one is no longer able to play alone with his brain elsewhere.

funny how the last time the AI was changed, everyone wend raving mad because they now have to watch after their drones. hinthint: just as new content will unavoidably be explored and exploited, so will any new AI. if there is at least one ship able to run it solo, everyone will just train for that ship and complain about their limited choices. if it is not soloable, people will multibox it. if it is not multiboxable, it's incursions.
now i'm not saying you should not add any new content or change the AI. you just have to be aware that after running the new content for a year or two any novelty will be gone and all that remains will be annoying drone watching, target switching or whatever else.

I should buy an Ishtar.

Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#34 - 2013-09-04 15:38:11 UTC
Loyal Follower wrote:
Novah Soul wrote:
Fanatic Row wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
Yes they do :) and it is on our to-do list.. but the content revamp is going to be a long process.
Instead of using resources to revamp and create new missions; have you considered releasing some kind of Steam Workshop for EVE missions, to the playerbase instead? Big smile

Ha that would be interesting. With the general tendency to troll from the eve playerbase, I could see missions that range from unsoloable sluggers that give almost no reward, to ones with a single frigate that pay better then some lvl 4s now. =P



That's why player's designs are only suggestions and are passed to Devs/Designers for quality/sanity control.


and 99.9999% of that player generated would be worthless shite that just wasted valuable Dev time in assessing it

very little has been done with their revamped mission creator tool, and what has been done is not that different from the regular L1-L5 missions, a small smattering of 'epic arcs' that have minor pathing choices almost seems like a wasted opportunity.



To make a comparison with another game
Anarchy Online had the best mission generating system I've seen so far in any MMO
Highly randomized pregenerated content, that was scalable by player choice
if you chose easier 'settings' the mission rewards were correspondingly lower

All we're missing is the floating !'s above the agents heads .. Essentially Eve uses the Quest-Hub (which sucks) system like WoW does.

just saying ...
Fanatic Row
Neo T.E.C.H.
#35 - 2013-09-04 16:10:25 UTC
Loyal Follower wrote:
Novah Soul wrote:
Fanatic Row wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
Yes they do :) and it is on our to-do list.. but the content revamp is going to be a long process.
Instead of using resources to revamp and create new missions; have you considered releasing some kind of Steam Workshop for EVE missions, to the playerbase instead? Big smile

Ha that would be interesting. With the general tendency to troll from the eve playerbase, I could see missions that range from unsoloable sluggers that give almost no reward, to ones with a single frigate that pay better then some lvl 4s now. =P



That's why player's designs are only suggestions and are passed to Devs/Designers for quality/sanity control.
I was thinking involve the ISDs in QA.

EVE is a sandbox and CCP are heavily focused on providing game mechanics for players to create their own content, and not spoon feed its players.

When you look at the turn-around time for updating existing graphical assets, it's pretty clear that CCP does not have a set-up that can support pumping out pre-made content at a pace a la Guild Wars 2.

Since the vision for CREST already includes player generated content in-game, they might as well get their toes wet and tackle the issue head on.

Yes, the majority of content will be sub-par, but almost just as certain is the fact that it will produce more and better missions than CCP could ever hope to do on their own.
Loyal Follower
Doomheim
#36 - 2013-09-04 18:34:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Loyal Follower
Fanatic Row wrote:
Loyal Follower wrote:
Novah Soul wrote:
Fanatic Row wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
Yes they do :) and it is on our to-do list.. but the content revamp is going to be a long process.
Instead of using resources to revamp and create new missions; have you considered releasing some kind of Steam Workshop for EVE missions, to the playerbase instead? Big smile

Ha that would be interesting. With the general tendency to troll from the eve playerbase, I could see missions that range from unsoloable sluggers that give almost no reward, to ones with a single frigate that pay better then some lvl 4s now. =P



That's why player's designs are only suggestions and are passed to Devs/Designers for quality/sanity control.
I was thinking involve the ISDs in QA.

EVE is a sandbox and CCP are heavily focused on providing game mechanics for players to create their own content, and not spoon feed its players.

When you look at the turn-around time for updating existing graphical assets, it's pretty clear that CCP does not have a set-up that can support pumping out pre-made content at a pace a la Guild Wars 2.

Since the vision for CREST already includes player generated content in-game, they might as well get their toes wet and tackle the issue head on.

Yes, the majority of content will be sub-par, but almost just as certain is the fact that it will produce more and better missions than CCP could ever hope to do on their own.



Good idea with the ISDs, they could be a first level screening. I did not know about CREST, although i have my doubts they will allow content submission for evaluation with this API. Do you have a link for it, for the part that you say it allows player generated content in-game ?
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#37 - 2013-09-05 01:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Sabriz Adoudel
My forum sig has a link to an idea I posted that was a PVP/PVE hybrid idea. I'd rather something like that to more missions.

If missions are deemed necessary though, how about changing the dynamics a bit, so that instead of one player vs. fifty failfit ships, it's instead one player vs. 3-4 very well fitted ships with unpredictable abilities?

Serpentis pirates should be MWDing into close range, hitting US with 90% webs, scramming us, and then opening fire with blasters, not just sending wave after wave of disposable idiots at us.

Rats should mix up EWAR and should always fit a scram and use it whenever it makes sense to do so.


And the pirate factions should have seriously learned by now about their perceived favorite damage types and should spread out the damage a bit.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#38 - 2013-09-05 02:03:45 UTC
dexington wrote:
Who cares about the AI as long as you can just sit in the middle, tank the damage, and shoot everything... they need to make harder missions that actually is challenging.


Have you tried sitting in the middle of showtime and tanking the damage ?
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-09-05 03:04:00 UTC
If anyone hasn't noticed CCP has been working on making the PVP aspect of the game better while nerfing the PVE parts. I do PVP but I don't have lots of RL cash to spend on Eve. I make ISK running missions to buy PLEX (subscription) and PVP ships.


Some things CCP has done to make missions less fun and profitable...

Drone AI changes.... Yes I understand you don't want AFK gameplay but there could have been better ways to deal with this.

Dumbing down the whole agent types and quality system. I liked the complexity of this although I realize CCP has to make the game where everyone can understand it.

Removing level 5 missions from highsec. Yes this can add a PVP aspect but if I want to PVP I'm going to do that and not run missions.



Some things CCP has done to make missions more fun and profitable

Noctis (Well maybe profitable but not fun)




If I'm overlooking something please feel free to add to either list.
Loyal Follower
Doomheim
#40 - 2013-09-05 08:57:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Loyal Follower
IIshira wrote:
If anyone hasn't noticed CCP has been working on making the PVP aspect of the game better while nerfing the PVE parts. I do PVP but I don't have lots of RL cash to spend on Eve. I make ISK running missions to buy PLEX (subscription) and PVP ships.


Some things CCP has done to make missions less fun and profitable...

Drone AI changes.... Yes I understand you don't want AFK gameplay but there could have been better ways to deal with this.

Dumbing down the whole agent types and quality system. I liked the complexity of this although I realize CCP has to make the game where everyone can understand it.

Removing level 5 missions from highsec. Yes this can add a PVP aspect but if I want to PVP I'm going to do that and not run missions.



Some things CCP has done to make missions more fun and profitable

Noctis (Well maybe profitable but not fun)




If I'm overlooking something please feel free to add to either list.



I fully understand what you are saying. I don't PvP though as you do and also i don't have a lot of RL income to spend on EVE too. That's why i am asking for the addition of more missions and perhaps more AI for the new missions only, without changing the old ones. I will repeat it one more time, there exists playerbase that are running missions for getting ISK just to fund other activities and people that love the PvE for that and the lore. So, the change should not hit anyone.

Take into consideration previous posts, i could say that we could propose, if CCP does not have the resources for making more level 4 missions/arcs to provide us the means to design/propose missions. I cannot speak about the means, maybe the CERT or other site mechanism, can't say. These mission designs would be submitted for evaluation to ISDs and/or mission content designers and they could do anything with them - evaluate, modify, balance, accept/reject in the end. We could say, that every month, only one level 4 mission from origination of players, the best one they judge can be selected and added/become available from that point and on in the game, as the players' mission of the month addition!