Missions & Complexes

This whole problem would have been solved if you had been smart enough to have not popped the mission loot rat until you were within distance to scoop loot just as you finish him off.

Stop whining because you don't know how to EVE.

This is definitely a solution to part of the problem.

But, if the griefer/thief decides to loot and run, the missioner is left without options.

The only way to even out the equation is to raise the risk to the griefer/thief or reduce it for the missioner.

I am in favor of just raising the risk to the criminal.

Think of how much more clever and superior all these "pirates" can feel if they have to actually assume a level of risk that is proportionate to the potential reward of the criminal/suspicious action....


It is really depriving "pirates" of the whole EVE gaming experience to allow them to PLEX several accounts with relatively little to no risk/effort/time.

ISK faucets are bad, right? Maybe it's time to start turning off the criminal ISK faucets?

I believe they are, sir... I believe they are.

All that CCP needs to do is look at a few wallets to verify this. And I really hope that they do.

I believe that it all comes down to the old ISK/hour equation.

In the case of the OP, the mission thief gets 700 mil per successful theft. They can do it with a low SP alt with little to no effort or game interaction. That is an ISK faucet, as much as AFK missioning was or more so.

CCP rightfully adjusted game mechanics to require more interaction from missioners.

I suspect that people like this Princess Achaja are making a whole lot more ISK for a whole lot less effort than any AFK missioner ever did.

I wonder how much time an AFK missioner would have to put in to make 700 mil...

And here we have people doing it multiple times with less effort/time spent....


Little to no SP required... cheap ship... little to no effort/time/skill required... big payoff....


Yeah, it's an ISK faucet. And every ganker and mission thief knows it.


Name one other way in EVE that you can PLEX an account with as little investment in training, equipment and time spent as this particular mission theft scenario.

Some more things:

Your first comment is pretty good evidence that you haven't thought this through. Let's examine the OP's situation using your mechanics.

He's bopping along in the Cosmos site, kicking NPC butt. Oh no! Mission Invaders! They're flashing yellow! Now what? First, he hasn't finished the mission or killed the ship that drops the item. Second, they are now killing ships and are about to kill the ship that drops the item. If he fires on them, they turn on him (though one guy will probably still go after the mission item). Lock, point, webs, painted. Ewar engaged. Then they start neuting your typical active PvE tank. Once the hardeners and reps go off, you're done. You've lost your ship. You may or may not also lose your pod and all of those pretty, pretty implants. As you warp away, you see your mission item get scooped. The likely cost of paying ransom for the item is half the total reward of the mission chain. Your ship and fittings likely cost more than the total rewards anyway. In other words, you lose.

So. What did the flag get you? Killed. In fact, unless you're baiting mission invaders in a properly fit ship, this will be the inevitable result of any and all attempts to engage PvP ships in a PvE ship. And if you're baiting them, you can do it just as well when they flag themselves, and they're definitely going to flag themselves.

If what you want is to prevent people from stealing Wei Todaki or some similar mission item, the solution is infinitely simpler. Just update missions so that the cans they're in are locked. You get the key with the mission acceptance. No need for contorted, convoluted, half-baked, poorly conceived total changes to game mechanics and philosophy.

Hisec is equal access public space. If you don't like it, then go somewhere where you're allowed to shoot people that enter.


No, they're not. If you can't see why this is terrible game design then you have no business making suggestions.

Ahh, ok, yes... maybe I should have said.... "ISK fountain?"

And I am 100% happy that you equated this to scamming. That is really a pretty accurate assessment.

Edit: Except for the fact that the missioner has time constraints, no realistic way to prevent/avoid/counter the theft and gets locked out of content upon failure***

Wow. I think I have heard the same reasoning to defend exploits as well. "I was smart enough to figure out the exploit, so I should be allowed to do it."

Mission theft, especially in this specific mission, is about as close to using an exploit as you can get without it being called such.

In fact the only thing maybe that prevents this from being classified as exploit is the fact that CCP hasn't said that it was unintended. But, I would say that CCP obviously knows there is a problem with it which is why they do reset missions.

However, even if it is "working as intended," it is still off balance. The risk/reward equation needs to be adjusted.

Raise the risk to the criminal or lower the risk to the missioner.

Either is fine.

And neither will be game breaking.

OK, gonna jump into this crapola again.

I pretty much agree with Abdul 'aleem.

Especially when it pertains to Cosmos Mission items. These missions are not like regular missions that keep getting offered over and over again. The player character only get's one chance to complete the Cosmos Mission, that's it.

Cosmos Missions are usually done solo primarily for the standing gain with the rewards being secondary. The standings and the rewards can not be shared with fleet.

I don't care what anyone says, changing the game mechanics pertaining to Cosmos Agents and Missions is way overdue, not to mention it isn't that hard for CCP to do.

I like the idea of someone warping into your Cosmos Deadspace site getting a suspect flag. Of course fleet members would be exempt. Naturally since the static Cosmos Complexes are public those sites would also be exempt. The only reason why somebody else besides a fleet member would warp into the Cosmos Deadspace site is to steal or gank, sometimes with intention of doing both.

That definitely would create more PvP action. Would also give the mission runner a chance to stop the invaders from getting the mission item.

Now let's get real about the whole mission situation. My mission area is my private Deadspace spot offered to me personally by my Agent. It's not a public static Complex nor does it have a beacon showing in the overview for other players to warp towards. As such, the game mechanics should allow me and anyone in my fleet to open fire on them just for trespassing. As I said earlier, the only reason they're in my mission area is to steal or gank, maybe with the intention of doing both.

By the way, I really hate seeing sarcastic, demeaning, troll remarks being posted, especially when it's directed to my country - USA. In fact, doesn't matter what country it is, I'm gonna report it next time.


DMC

This is definitely one potential solution.

As mentioned earlier though, I am personally in favor of allowing the potential for the suspicous*** act (trespassing/mission invasion), just adjusting the risk/reward balance and adding the potential for counter-play which is at best extremely low (meaning only an option if the thief chooses to PvP bait and only after the item has already been stolen).

Measure of risk ----> Opportunity cost and suspect flags. They steal from you because it's easy. Michi's has a huge reward for the time spent, and you're no risk because you're incompetent. It's a very simple equation. Stop holding your money out in front of you on a busy street and people are less likely to take it.