These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

L4 mission running needs financial buff

Author
Infrequent
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2014-07-29 10:33:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Infrequent
No they don't, they need to be made more challenging, have more interaction, they should really hint towards higher level forms of pve and maybe even pvp for those who are confident enough. We need highsec missions to be far less saturated than they are now, people should feel the need to move onto bigger and better things (L5s, epic arcs, incursions, WH daytripping, the list goes on), not just sit and grind L4s 24/7.
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#22 - 2014-07-29 10:44:20 UTC
The lack of conflict in isk generation makes it far to easy. The Plex price increase simply represents an increase in the ease of making isk.

Anomalies, Missions, incursions... these all have practically zero overlap in terms of multiple pilots making money.

Rewind a few years to where 0.0 systems had 1-10 asteroid belts, with a 1-2 BS rats every 2/3 belts. Now you have 6 BS rats spawning on-top of you every few minutes in anomalies.

Sorry OP - i think ALL isk generation should be nerfed, not increased.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#23 - 2014-07-29 11:56:01 UTC
Maeltstome wrote:
The lack of conflict in isk generation makes it far to easy. The Plex price increase simply represents an increase in the ease of making isk.

Anomalies, Missions, incursions... these all have practically zero overlap in terms of multiple pilots making money.

Rewind a few years to where 0.0 systems had 1-10 asteroid belts, with a 1-2 BS rats every 2/3 belts. Now you have 6 BS rats spawning on-top of you every few minutes in anomalies.

Sorry OP - i think ALL isk generation should be nerfed, not increased.

The majority of the isk entering the game is from Null Sec bounties.
Second largest source seems to be WH NPC buy orders.
Incursions & Missions are nowhere near those two in how much isk enters the game.

When you add LP, missions become somewhat competitive with WH's if you assume all LP is worth the same as SOE LP... Which obviously it isn't.

However level 4's make a fine amount of Isk.

What needs a huge buff is level 1 & 2 missions and a slight buff to level 3's in terms of isk (So that blitz runners on lvl 3's don't see very much increase)
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-07-29 13:37:12 UTC
I agree with those saying L4 pay well enough. And I also was too lazy before to loot all these wrecks, blitzing approach is less tedious for me. And before you ask for isk/hour buff some proofs are needed which will show that those droped items constitute for significant part in cumulative reward per mission. Like their approximate drop rate and such, to make some estimation on how much reward be put down. If 5 of them are dropped per mission, and each lost in value 500000 isks.. Well, not even an issue. Some of them, like meta 3-4 turrets, still valuable too.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link

S'Way
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2014-07-29 14:45:22 UTC
As a blitzer the changes haven't affected me - yet I have to agree they should buff L4's a little in some way.

Why ? well a lot of players in the game use mission running to fund their pvp ships. When they make less or have to grind longer to do so they become more risk averse due to valuing those ships higher.

The argument of "there's too much isk generation in the game already" may be true, but that's due to other areas being far too profitable - (yes I mean things like high sec incursions).
To those saying just run incursions then - a lot of fleets only want high skilled characters with decent ships, the people who the indirect L4 nerfs have hit most (players who are just into their first battleship and trying to get some isk generated for other things) won't easily be able to do those given the limited number of fleets and requirements they have.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#26 - 2014-07-29 14:58:42 UTC
Reading a few replies and seeing nobody willing to really acknowledge the questions I asked; or rather proposed to be asked, I am inlcined to think a bit in the direction of 'what if ...'.

If the income from Missions should be increased, then the following way (no increase value given, just internal distribution):

Security missions:
Only via loot (20%) and salvage (80%), which will balance out invested time and effort and/or allows to offer or sell bookmarks to salvagers, who again invest more time and effort. No increase in LP, which would support blitz, or bounties which would also support blitz and pure combate effective capsuleers.

Mining Missions:

ISK reward (80%), LP (20%). The ISk reward is a bit low, LPs feel right, otherwise mining missions have other substatual benefits. Rats and thereby bounties do not need to eb increased. Adding generic rare roids could substitute increased rewards by offering for extra effort extra income from time invested to mine the rare ores.

Distribution missions:
ISK (50%) LP (50%). Both have equal value. The other way to increase income would be to chain missions. One mission will lead to another agent which can be used of the same quality and so forth until after 4-6 agents the route will return to the first agent. (but this is more related to the mission revamp then income).

And yes, L2 (70%) and L3 (30%) need a slight increase in payout, slight.

But if you ask me, this should all be discussed and adjusted with a complete misison overhaul.
Thorr VonAsgard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2014-07-29 15:08:38 UTC
go null or wh if you want money.

no risk, no reward.

You miss blink ? Come and play with us at EVE-Lotteries.com !

Envie de fraicheur ? Frugu, le forum fruité est fait pour toi !

Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#28 - 2014-07-29 15:29:56 UTC
Thorr VonAsgard wrote:
go null or wh if you want money.

no risk, no reward.

Same old and dumb misconception. Risk & Reward do not always include exposure to PvP.
Aeril Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
#29 - 2014-07-29 15:38:42 UTC
I'm holding out for the meta 1-4 rebalance. Once all those items go from being 'incrementally better, just buy meta 4' to 'everything has a purpose', looting missions will be profitable once more. Assuming CCP doesn't nerf the loot tables when it happens.

Which, upon reflection, they probably will.
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University
#30 - 2014-07-29 15:58:26 UTC
Maybe level 4s in lowsec needs a buff? Not sure if level 4s in general need it.

Is that my two cents or yours?

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2014-07-29 17:19:05 UTC
Thorr VonAsgard wrote:
go null or wh if you want money.

no risk, no reward.



I agree.

Though the odd thing is, in a SOE hub I'm actually far more likely to be killed than rolling anoms in null.
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2014-07-29 17:25:27 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
The value of looted items from L4's has dropped with some items losing >50% of their value and some essentially reaching the point of being of no real ISK value at all.

I would like to see a scaling implementation of mission payouts both in terms of LP and straight ISK rewards for mission completions. I don't know if this is needed for all mission types but certainly the highsec L4 payouts need a scalable change.

Yes I'm aware of the reason for the L4 loot price drop, yes I'm aware that highsec is safer than other regions but killing off about 20-30% of our income is too much of a hit.

Your idea would be perfect for Level 4's in low and null, but not your highsec carebear campaign
sci0gon
Kaira Innovations
#33 - 2014-07-29 19:51:05 UTC  |  Edited by: sci0gon
in general any comment about a buff to PVE content in the game invokes a lot of people climbing up the walls because they want to see high sec as crap as possible with all the main focus being given towards null. Yes it is nice for those who are already out in null space and the puppets that they allow to stay there with standings or those that rent from them as it gives them access to that while paying a fraction of their earnings towards the rent. (smirks)

PVE in general does need a overhaul, I honestly hope it does not involve the same as it did in the past when they nerfed bounties across the board. All I can say is that when ccp starts working on it I hope they look at the whole picture and not just the areas with the most activity.


S'Way wrote:
The argument of "there's too much isk generation in the game already" may be true, but that's due to other areas being far too profitable - (yes I mean things like high sec incursions).
To those saying just run incursions then - a lot of fleets only want high skilled characters with decent ships, the people who the indirect L4 nerfs have hit most (players who are just into their first battleship and trying to get some isk generated for other things) won't easily be able to do those given the limited number of fleets and requirements they have.


s'way, sorry to say but from my experience of running incursions they don't care about skills as long as they can run with the pre-determined fitted ships they have listed and I have personally watched people with crap skills go from barely using t1 guns to using t2 guns thanks to the skill change ccp done making access to them a lot easier and in line with the T2 missile launcher skills.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#34 - 2014-07-29 19:57:09 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
Lol no. L4 missions still pay too well for how silly easy they are.


Do you know where the ISK was transferred to effectively?

Im guessing you do not so i shall enlighten you, it went to miners. I have no beef with miners my alt mines all day, but if it bothers you that L4 missions are too easy for the return they get then im guessing you wouldnt be thrilled to find out where the ISK went.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#35 - 2014-07-29 19:59:01 UTC
Pheusia wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
The value of looted items from L4's has dropped with some items losing >50% of their value and some essentially reaching the point of being of no real ISK value at all.

I would like to see a scaling implementation of mission payouts both in terms of LP and straight ISK rewards for mission completions. I don't know if this is needed for all mission types but certainly the highsec L4 payouts need a scalable change.

Yes I'm aware of the reason for the L4 loot price drop, yes I'm aware that highsec is safer than other regions but killing off about 20-30% of our income is too much of a hit.


It's a gross exaggeration to say that L4 income has been generally reduced by 30% or even 20%.


I checked the amount of ISK generated for me personally the way i run missions, what method did you use to arrive at your conclusion?

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#36 - 2014-07-29 20:03:10 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Now factor in all the buffs to ships used for running missions and how they have affected ISK generation from high-sec missions.


All of which existed before the nerf to ISK. I don't recall CCP saying that because of the buffs to ships used in running L4's we are going to nerf L4 ISK returns. If you have a link to such a post I would be open to discussing it further.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#37 - 2014-07-29 20:11:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Danika Princip wrote:
But I thought the way you guys made the most money from them was to completely ignore all the drops, blitz the missions as quickly as possible and just roll on to the next one?


Blitzing was the most profitable way of running missions, it in fact has become even more profitable because looting has dropped in value by so much.

I would like to keep blitzing as the more profitable method as it takes a bit more knowledge and skill than running L4s the full clear method.

As things stand now though there will be more pressure on all mission runners to just blitz and that's bad for play style diversity in an area where diversity is already severely lacking.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#38 - 2014-07-29 20:44:18 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
Now factor in all the buffs to ships used for running missions and how they have affected ISK generation from high-sec missions.


All of which existed before the nerf to ISK. I don't recall CCP saying that because of the buffs to ships used in running L4's we are going to nerf L4 ISK returns. If you have a link to such a post I would be open to discussing it further.

I don't think you get what I'm saying. A buff to combat ships is a buff to L4 ISK. Especially when they're Marauders and Pirate BSes, but not excluding all other types too.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#39 - 2014-07-29 20:57:59 UTC
Ive read some posts and realized my original suggestion would in fact benefit blitzing too much so I'm altering my suggestion to include a triad of changes:

1. A one time increase to LP payouts (as someone else suggested the inclusion of [more?] LP items only offered by mission agents)

2. Mission payouts indexed to the value of plex (this needs to be done so that skills related to payouts retrain their value).

3. Mission rat payouts indexed to plex (there might need to be some rat payout redistribution as it currently favors killing only BS's too heavily).


This is NOT a mission income buff and I take exception to those respondents characterizing it as such. It is simply a request to compensate L4 runners for income that was effectively transferred from L4 runners to miners.

I will restate here that I have a miner and he mines all day, I hold no ill will towards miners and I'm thrilled to get an income buff to my miner but not at the expense of L4 runners.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#40 - 2014-07-29 21:11:47 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
1. A one time increase to LP payouts (as someone else suggested the inclusion of [more?] LP items only offered by mission agents)

First part benefits blitzers, no idea what you plan for the second part.

Quote:
2. Mission payouts indexed to the value of plex (this needs to be done so that skills related to payouts retrain their value).

3. Mission rat payouts indexed to plex (there might need to be some rat payout redistribution as it currently favors killing only BS's too heavily).
Would have been ideal, but CCP have already lost their grip on power creep and don't seem to have any intention of reining it back in.

Quote:
This is NOT a mission income buff and I take exception to those respondents characterizing it as such. It is simply a request to compensate L4 runners for income that was effectively transferred from L4 runners to miners.

They don't need to be compensated, they need to adapt.