These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#1081 - 2013-09-08 23:21:42 UTC
rabble! rabblerabblerabble! rabble rabble! Roll

Signatures should be used responsibly...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1082 - 2013-09-08 23:21:58 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:


How will nerfing high make it easier to play in null then? You'll just have less high sec income to spend on null.

And nerfing incomes won't result in lower prices according to CCP. Prices aren't tied to the money supply.


It would give us a reason to do our PVE out in null because it would earn us more than in high sec.
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1083 - 2013-09-08 23:23:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:


I won't because I shouldn't. You either aren't understanding or are being intentionally obstinate.



Oh I fully understand. Hence why I am in high sec earning my isk to defend our empire in nullsec. Odd how the population of a null empire is better off earning their isk to defend their space from outside of their empire no?
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:

If your sole purpose of existing is to make isk, you shouldn't be in null to begin with.


Please point me to the free ships and mods.

Pr1ncess Alia wrote:

Null exists for endgame player vs player conflict.


No, null is there for us to build our own empires. It is not intended to be verboten to the PVE playerbase, they have just as much right to be there.



And they are there. There are many entities in null and wh space that pve to a great extreme.

How do you not understand this: If you have a problem with making isk in null, it has nothing to do with high sec missioning.

If it does, feel free to point to whatever evidence you have that shows where lvl 4 missioners are making it impossible for you to make isk.

YOU want a boost to null faucets. Nothing wrong with that, you can make that case. But crying because it's easier for you to make isk in high sec isn't going to get you anywhere. Nor is nerfing lvl 4 missions in high sec.

Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1084 - 2013-09-08 23:25:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


How will nerfing high make it easier to play in null then? You'll just have less high sec income to spend on null.

And nerfing incomes won't result in lower prices according to CCP. Prices aren't tied to the money supply.


It would give us a reason to do our PVE out in null because it would earn us more than in high sec.


YOU DONT NEED A REASON

The word you are looking for is balance.

And you can balance null incomes, mineral resources and everything else without discussing lvl 4 missions in high security space.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1085 - 2013-09-08 23:26:58 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:


And they are there. There are many entities in null and wh space that pve to a great extreme.

How do you not understand this: If you have a problem with making isk in null, it has nothing to do with high sec missioning.

If it does, feel free to point to whatever evidence you have that shows where lvl 4 missioners are making it impossible for you to make isk.

YOU want a boost to null faucets. Nothing wrong with that, you can make that case. But crying because it's easier for you to make isk in high sec isn't going to get you anywhere. Nor is nerfing lvl 4 missions in high sec.



Again, it makes no sence to be out in null when you can earn the exact same income or better in high sec where you are perfectly safe.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1086 - 2013-09-08 23:27:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Quote:
Yes, but you don't balance the activities against each other because the economy is where the similarity ends. Otherwise they are separate games being played by separate rules and mechanics... separate goals and mentalities.


So? They use the same money, (mostly) get it the same ways, and buy the same stuff with it.

They don't have less need for the things they buy with money. Arguably, they have more need of those things (seeing as they are a small proportion of the population, but lose the most ships).

Money, and how much of it you can get and where you can get it, matters.

They're not separate games. They might be played differently, and the rules might be a bit different, but it's still EVE Online, isn't it?
Quote:

but
I
C A N
N O T

balance the two against each other.

It's a fools errand because they are different games entirely.


No, they are both EVE Online. People are, due to the unbalanced isk/risk ratio in highsec, making money in high, to use in null, because null (and everything else) sucks in comparison.

Why is that ok to you?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1087 - 2013-09-08 23:27:39 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
If you run out of pudding after every ogre encounter, you're doing it wrong.

but the ogres are stopping you getting the pudding
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1088 - 2013-09-08 23:28:24 UTC
Yeah, go go level 4 missions !!

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1089 - 2013-09-08 23:29:16 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


How will nerfing high make it easier to play in null then? You'll just have less high sec income to spend on null.

And nerfing incomes won't result in lower prices according to CCP. Prices aren't tied to the money supply.


It would give us a reason to do our PVE out in null because it would earn us more than in high sec.


YOU DONT NEED A REASON

The word you are looking for is balance.

And you can balance null incomes, mineral resources and everything else without discussing lvl 4 missions in high security space.


Yes, we do need a reason to take on the higher effort, risk and downtime that happens in null.

Level 4 missions are one of the main things that are causing the problem. CCP will not buff null again due to what happened last time they tried so that leaves us with but one option.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1090 - 2013-09-08 23:29:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


How will nerfing high make it easier to play in null then? You'll just have less high sec income to spend on null.

And nerfing incomes won't result in lower prices according to CCP. Prices aren't tied to the money supply.


It would give us a reason to do our PVE out in null because it would earn us more than in high sec.


You'd still make the same amount of money in null now before and after the change. Are you blaming the game because you can't resist the alure of high sec? That you need them to nerf it to prevent you from playing it?

You would just as poor in null as you were before and after this change.

If you really want to be in null earning the lesser of icomes you can do it now and it would be same as it would be doing it then.

So why not go now? Again, prices won't drop if you nerf high so your income won't change if you were in null to begin with.


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
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1091 - 2013-09-08 23:32:24 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


How will nerfing high make it easier to play in null then? You'll just have less high sec income to spend on null.

And nerfing incomes won't result in lower prices according to CCP. Prices aren't tied to the money supply.


It would give us a reason to do our PVE out in null because it would earn us more than in high sec.


YOU DONT NEED A REASON

The word you are looking for is balance.

And you can balance null incomes, mineral resources and everything else without discussing lvl 4 missions in high security space.


Yes, we do need a reason to take on the higher effort, risk and downtime that happens in null.

Level 4 missions are one of the main things that are causing the problem. CCP will not buff null again due to what happened last time they tried so that leaves us with but one option.

Going to highsec?

Adapt or die while ratting in null

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1092 - 2013-09-08 23:33:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia
baltec1 wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:


And they are there. There are many entities in null and wh space that pve to a great extreme.

How do you not understand this: If you have a problem with making isk in null, it has nothing to do with high sec missioning.

If it does, feel free to point to whatever evidence you have that shows where lvl 4 missioners are making it impossible for you to make isk.

YOU want a boost to null faucets. Nothing wrong with that, you can make that case. But crying because it's easier for you to make isk in high sec isn't going to get you anywhere. Nor is nerfing lvl 4 missions in high sec.



Again, it makes no sence to be out in null when you can earn the exact same income or better in high sec where you are perfectly safe.



Then this isn't the game you want to play.


Let's say for a moment we cut the amount of isk in half that you would make in a level 4 mission.

Now lets double every isk and asset payout in null.

Good so far?

It will still be easier for me to make isk in high sec.

Not only that, but there will be more conflict to control the resources we just opened up in null.

In fact, one might go so far as to suggest (with all the history of this game to support it) that you will see a rise in the amount of assets destroyed in conflict over these resources. IN FACT, there will be a direct correlation between the isk destroyed to the isk faucets available.

If you think nerfing high sec is going to change your ability to make isk in null sec you are sorely mistaken.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1093 - 2013-09-08 23:33:44 UTC
What I think you are trying to say is...

I want to be null sec, but I'm not there because I am too greedy.

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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1094 - 2013-09-08 23:34:28 UTC
Quote:
You would just as poor in null as you were before and after this change.


Strictly on the income? Yes.

But income, and wealth, is comparative, and always will be.

Going to go ahead and repeat the basic principle.

Should the safest way to make money also be the most lucrative? If yes, how do you justify that this invalidates other areas of space?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1095 - 2013-09-08 23:36:20 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:


You'd still make the same amount of money in null now before and after the change. Are you blaming the game because you can't resist the alure of high sec? That you need them to nerf it to prevent you from playing it?



Yes. I will naturally use the best options open to me as will everyone else.

Captain Tardbar wrote:
You would just as poor in null as you were before and after this change.


That doesn't matter. What matters is that null would offer the better income for those willing to take on the extra effort, risk, and dowtimes.

Captain Tardbar wrote:

If you really want to be in null earning the lesser of icomes you can do it now and it would be same as it would be doing it then.

So why not go now? Again, prices won't drop if you nerf high so your income won't change if you were in null to begin with.




We dont care about prices dropping or not. What we want is to be rewarded for the extra effort, risk and forced downtimes in null.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1096 - 2013-09-08 23:37:31 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Not only that, but there will be more conflict to control the resources we just opened up in null.

MISSION SUCCESS STAR COMMAND WE'RE ON OUR WAY HOME o7
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1097 - 2013-09-08 23:37:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


You'd still make the same amount of money in null now before and after the change. Are you blaming the game because you can't resist the alure of high sec? That you need them to nerf it to prevent you from playing it?



Yes. I will naturally use the best options open to me as will everyone else.

Captain Tardbar wrote:
You would just as poor in null as you were before and after this change.


That doesn't matter. What matters is that null would offer the better income for those willing to take on the extra effort, risk, and dowtimes.

Captain Tardbar wrote:

If you really want to be in null earning the lesser of icomes you can do it now and it would be same as it would be doing it then.

So why not go now? Again, prices won't drop if you nerf high so your income won't change if you were in null to begin with.




We dont care about prices dropping or not. What we want is to be rewarded for the extra effort, risk and forced downtimes in null.


You are rewarded, you just aren't on top of the food chain.

Or did you think every null sec empire in history came to be because they farmed high sec level 4 missions with their alts to fuel their null game?
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1098 - 2013-09-08 23:38:45 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Not only that, but there will be more conflict to control the resources we just opened up in null.

MISSION SUCCESS STAR COMMAND WE'RE ON OUR WAY HOME o7


dont get excited. I promise you, the pudding equation will balance itself.

See, the pudding pile gets bigger? So do the ogres.

It's how the game works.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1099 - 2013-09-08 23:40:02 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:



Let's say for a moment we cut the amount of isk in half that you would make in a level 4 mission.

Now lets double every isk and asset payout in null.

Good so far?

It will still be easier for me to make isk in high sec.

Not only that, but there will be more conflict to control the resources we just opened up in null.

In fact, one might go so far as to suggest (with all the history of this game to support it) that you will see a rise in the amount of assets destroyed in conflict over these resources. IN FACT, there will be a direct correlation between the isk destroyed to the isk faucets available.

If you think nerfing high sec is going to change your ability to make isk in null sec you are sorely mistaken.


We would be getting more reward than high sec offers though so we would be happy because we will be getting rewarded for the extra effort and risk we take.

We would also be happy with more fights.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1100 - 2013-09-08 23:41:05 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Not only that, but there will be more conflict to control the resources we just opened up in null.

MISSION SUCCESS STAR COMMAND WE'RE ON OUR WAY HOME o7


dont get excited. I promise you, the pudding equation will balance itself.

See, the pudding pile gets bigger? So do the ogres.

It's how the game works.

Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
why would anyone choose the ogre pudding


because they want to fight the ogres

DUH!

P

do you even eve?