Player Features and Ideas Discussion

For perspective, how many freighters have you ganked?

Also, you should probably learn the difference between risks and consequences. A lot of the 'risks' you listed are actually consequences of your inability to protect yourself.

Would it not be more reasonable to request CCP to have uncompleted COSMOS missions reset after downtime like every other mission? That is not only completely reasonable, but something literally no one would contest.

Exactly. The thief is flagging himself to be attacked by anyone. The mission runner is not. The thief receives a reward of 500m. The mission runner gets 1.5bn. I don't see how this is relevant to the issue though.

From experience, mission runners don't want counter-play options, they simply want to be left alone. The whole MTU debacle is a prime example of this mentality.

EDIT: 1.5b for 2 hours of plebian grinding? I'll have to run myself some COSMOS missions, I think there's some in nullsec.

Insta-warping where? He's not docking up and you've already said he's in an NPC corp so he doesn't have a POS.


It isn't. The thief has spent many hours developing and refining a playstyle to profit from your adversity to player interaction. If you spent a little time planning and working with others, he wouldn't be able to steal from you. The fact is, he's put the work in and you haven't so he deserves the reward and you don't.

On the whole I feel that people scanning you down in a mission isn't an issue on the whole, however some missions like this one could probably benefit from a redesign to try and make the risk/reward/effort of the involved parties somewhat fairer.

The mission in question doesn't offer a great deal of opportunity for the mission runner to attack or delay a looter – the mission has 5 pockets and you land on the gate for all the acceleration gates, so the only time you have to travel is in the last pocket to grab the item, so the last pocket is the only time your likely to have a chance to engage the looter and even then its only a very limited window you have.

Increasing the time that it takes the looter to leave the pocket after grabbing the item could help even things up, be it by making it take longer to get the by maybe making it so the wreck needs to be hacked/salvaged before you can get the item or something similar, or making it longer to warp off by adding an environmental damage style effect that prevents warping for X seconds for anyone in the pocket. Alternatively they could place a field like the one they are putting on the ESS. This would prevent the mission runner leaving straight away as well meaning a looter could shoot them if they felt the mission item is worth the risk.

Alternatively the mission could be changed to respawn at DT. The mission item would inevitably become less valuable as it would be easier to replace, but as its a one off mission that you cant repeat it would still have a reasonable value, especially if the looter has spent a lot of time working on a system to steal the item and was therefore quite good at it.

Looking at unique missions in a wider sense a key system could maybe be put in place for some of them – similar to what they did in the Gallente arc with the carry on token. Add an optional smaller mission where you can get a key to bypass a section of the mission through a locked gate, while leaving another gate open to anyone. This would mean that it would still be possible to get to the item before the mission runner if the looter is willing to commit enough resources to it.

Making the item unique to person who accepts the mission could also help. The item becomes more valuable to 'owner' as they cant buy a replacement from someone else, but also means the looter has to work harder to make isk from stealing it as they have ton convince the owner to buy it back from them. Going back to the idea of keeping the looter on site longer the item could be in a container that only they could loot, but that the looter could destroy. This was the looter has to hang around if they want to convince the mission runner to pay them – increasing the opportunity for the mission runner to get backup/decide what to do.

Anyway this is just me 2 cents and most of these ideas are probably terrible, but you never know I may come up with a good one someday...

We know from previous experience that it won't go down like this. People like me would love this change, mission runners would scream about it until CCP changed it & said change would likely be really terrible because bad ideas are CCP's thing.

Hey, this is entirely possible. It could happen as far as people screaming, and it is pretty much a given that everyone may not be entirely happy.

But right now, the thing is pretty broken and as someone else posted in another thread the result if left as is is most likely that people will just not do the missions.

Now look at it rationally: where does that leave the missioner? Content lost/ not experienced.

You're a mission thief, fine. Where does that leave the mission thief? No one running these missions = no more mission thieving here also.

Who wins long term? No one. And not only that the game as a whole has wasted content.

That's why I say it is a game balance issue: ultimately both parties lose long term due to a broken mechanic that prevents legitimate counter-play.

This suggestion is to add a suspect flag for the trespasser at the time that they choose to start warping to the mission pocket, which is a suspicious act.

The criminal system mechanics would remain the same.

edit: My use of the term criminal was a mistake and may have confused you. The suggestion is for a suspect flag to be generated for trespassing / mission invasion. I have corrected all posts to reflect this.