These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Size Matters: Introducing Burner Missions

First post First post First post
Author
Dave stark
#121 - 2014-08-14 19:36:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Mike Azariah wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

it's not about "not being bothered" or "not affording" anything.

the demographic for l4 missions is a battleship. the demographic for these is a frigate.
the two are chalk and cheese. that's why it's a dumb implementation of the idea.


I don't know if you run missions, Dave, but when I do I slowly build a stable of ships in that hub so I can run the specifics (Like a cruiser well tanked for the Recon 3/3 L4 mission) and I also keep a fast ship to commute to other things/places. Adding a good frigate or two to that stable will be just fine with me. Is it an extra expense? Yes, but one I am willing to pay for some variety

m


i do occasionally run them, in 1 ship because they're so trivial.

and that ship sure as hell isn't a frigate.

that way i don't have load of ships stuck in the arse end of nowhere.

the point is, that you're aiming a mission designed for 1 demographic at a demographic who won't do it. it's not a case of what you'd personally do, nobody cares what you'd personally do.

ccp are trying to sell steaks to vegans here, essentially.

as a stand alone set of missions from separate agents these will be fun to run, randomly getting them while you're doing things that simply don't fit what these missions are aimed at... it's just nonsensical.

although, i guess ccp already know most people will skip them because of the bad implementation, and that's why there's no standing penalty for skipping over them.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#122 - 2014-08-14 19:40:25 UTC
Good stuff, all around. Big smile

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#123 - 2014-08-14 19:42:19 UTC
any possibility of getting similar ones for pirate factions? hunting down known bounty hunters, or taking out police commanders?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#124 - 2014-08-14 19:45:06 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
although, i guess ccp already know most people will skip them because of the bad implementation, and that's why there's no standing penalty for skipping over them.


Nothing about this arrangement strikes me as permanent. It's more like, "here, we're trying these out. if you like them, run them and tell us what you think."

From a development POV, there's no reason to build out a whole new interface to accommodate 5 new missions that still run on the old AI, while they're building out a whole new system underneath it, so they didn't do that.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Dave stark
#125 - 2014-08-14 19:49:53 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
although, i guess ccp already know most people will skip them because of the bad implementation, and that's why there's no standing penalty for skipping over them.


Nothing about this arrangement strikes me as permanent. It's more like, "here, we're trying these out. if you like them, run them and tell us what you think."

From a development POV, there's no reason to build out a whole new interface to accommodate 5 new missions that still run on the old AI, while they're building out a whole new system underneath it, so they didn't do that.


sure there's a reason; the reason is so you don't waste content putting it where players won't access it.

of the few people i've spoken to since i got home from work who were interested in these missions, they've pretty much all lost interest when i told them you have to mindlessly grind l4s until the rng gods let you have a go at one of these new ones.
Erin Crawford
#126 - 2014-08-14 19:50:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Erin Crawford
Quote:
We look forward to hearing your feedback on these mission in the feedback thread. What are you looking forward to most about these Burner Missions? What do you think could be improved about the concept? What kinds of new mission types would you like to see us add next?


I’m looking forward to these new missions! Can’t wait!

As for new mission types..?

What if npc ‘reacted’ or scaled in difficulty based on how easy one kills npc: ie. you warp into the first room and kill the first set of npc, depending on how fast and how easy this was done, the following room would adjust in difficulty either by adding more npc or different npc ships classes or both. And if you bring help, like a friend or two, the mission npc call in even more support to aid them - again based on the group performance.

Essentially this would mean a scalable difficulty with parameters taken on ease of npc kills, maybe even player ship-class(like frig, carrier, bs, t1 or t2…) or even player SP and average player group SP - these could all affect mission difficulty settings.

This would actually then do away with this type of mission level system, l1, l2, l3, etc… since the difficulty and challenge would be based on a whole string of player/character info. If i have a character with 9mill sp and i take a t1 frig into the mission it will have x-difficulty, but if i go to the same mission in a t2 frig it’ll be x-times harder.

There could be and very long list of variables that could affect the mission difficulty and so make them interesting and less procedural.

just my 2c…


*edit: damn spellcheck telling me I'm fly frogs when I'm flying frigs! Pfff! Roll

"Those who talk don’t know. Those who know don’t talk. "

Aquinas II
PostgreSQL
#127 - 2014-08-14 19:51:38 UTC
Kraizer793 wrote:
As awesome as the idea is, I really don't think they'll be used.

The people who will be attracted to this type of mission are, in my experience, the type who won't want to bother grinding out traditional L4's in all their mind-numbing tedium.

The people who like L4's or run them for ISK's sake will likely just skip them. due to the risk and skill involved, just skipping it and going back to blitzing Dread Pirate Scarlet for the seventh time that day is much easier...

Some players will do these because they like the challenge of a good PvP fight, but don't want to deal with the BS that comes along with PvP. You can have a guaranteed challenging fight, don't have to worry that your target is baiting you for the rest of his gang with Logi support. You don't have to spend hours gate camping. You can log in run this mission and log out. You obviously aren't guaranteed to get it everytime, but its practical for people with limited playtime and busy lives. In theory, this will teach care bears better skills so they can be more confident about moving into PvP.

I'm looking forward to the day when Ewar works the same against NPCs as it does with players.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2014-08-14 19:51:59 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

it's not about "not being bothered" or "not affording" anything.

the demographic for l4 missions is a battleship. the demographic for these is a frigate.
the two are chalk and cheese. that's why it's a dumb implementation of the idea.


I don't know if you run missions, Dave, but when I do I slowly build a stable of ships in that hub so I can run the specifics (Like a cruiser well tanked for the Recon 3/3 L4 mission) and I also keep a fast ship to commute to other things/places. Adding a good frigate or two to that stable will be just fine with me. Is it an extra expense? Yes, but one I am willing to pay for some variety

m


i do occasionally run them, in 1 ship because they're so trivial.

and that ship sure as hell isn't a frigate.

that way i don't have load of ships stuck in the arse end of nowhere.

the point is, that you're aiming a mission designed for 1 demographic at a demographic who won't do it. it's not a case of what you'd personally do, nobody cares what you'd personally do.

ccp are trying to sell steaks to vegans here, essentially.

as a stand alone set of missions from separate agents these will be fun to run, randomly getting them while you're doing things that simply don't fit what these missions are aimed at... it's just nonsensical.

although, i guess ccp already know most people will skip them because of the bad implementation, and that's why there's no standing penalty for skipping over them.


These will suit me fine actually, I have standings for level IV missions but don't fly BS because I just don't like them. I'll be skipping the standard missions waiting for the burners.
Dave stark
#129 - 2014-08-14 19:54:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
These will suit me fine actually, I have standings for level IV missions but don't fly BS because I just don't like them. I'll be skipping the standard missions waiting for the burners.


then you won't have the standings for IV missions for very long. (or potentially wait days between missions if you wait for the 4hr timer to expire)

then again if ccp were to just implement them separately, that wouldn't be an issue.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#130 - 2014-08-14 20:01:11 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
These will suit me fine actually, I have standings for level IV missions but don't fly BS because I just don't like them. I'll be skipping the standard missions waiting for the burners.


then you won't have the standings for IV missions for very long. (or potentially wait days between missions if you wait for the 4hr timer to expire)

then again if ccp were to just implement them separately, that wouldn't be an issue.


It's already been clearly stated that you can request a mission every 4 hours without a standings hit *per agent*

Depending on your standings, you could have access to a number of agents that you can hit up for missions round robin while waiting out your 4 hour timer on the others. This could easily be done by low/null-sec players as they roam looking for fights in their frigates.

Not everyone grinds 24x7 in the same basic circle with the same agent doing the same content as it is fed to them...
Dark Drifter
Sons of Seyllin
Pirate Lords of War
#131 - 2014-08-14 20:04:35 UTC
just an added thaught:

add these as cosmic anoms.

low spawn in high

high spawn in low

norm spawn in null

high spawn in WH
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#132 - 2014-08-14 20:07:47 UTC
been putting a list together of all the lv 4 agents I have access to within a couple jumps. Cant wait to try they out.

The whole request mission decline if bad and request another if bad wait 4 hours rinse and repeat is what I do for lv5's, Now with more agents available at lv 4's I hope I can cycle them a little more.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#133 - 2014-08-14 20:08:19 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
These will suit me fine actually, I have standings for level IV missions but don't fly BS because I just don't like them. I'll be skipping the standard missions waiting for the burners.


then you won't have the standings for IV missions for very long. (or potentially wait days between missions if you wait for the 4hr timer to expire)

then again if ccp were to just implement them separately, that wouldn't be an issue.


I can wait since I do all sorts of other things. These will add another area of the game for me and are a good sign of things to come I think.
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#134 - 2014-08-14 20:18:18 UTC
I like this idea. I like it soooo much I might actually run missions again.



I also cant wait for all the "ARGH RABBLE BLARG WHAY CANT I USE MY AFK MISSION ISHTAR IN THESE MISSIONS!!!! CCP NEEDS TO LET CRUISERS INTO FRIG BATTLE!!! ARGH RABBLE BLARG!!!!!" threads because highsec.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#135 - 2014-08-14 20:18:36 UTC
Erin Crawford wrote:


*edit: damn spellcheck telling me I'm fly frogs when I'm flying frigs! Pfff! Roll


Maybe they are Gallente ships, green and of french origin

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)

voetius
Grundrisse
#136 - 2014-08-14 20:19:29 UTC
Nam Dnilb wrote:
Matthias Azaharel wrote:
I really like this new direction for PvE content. Two things concern me:

1. As everyone and their grandmother's cat has already said, I would prefer this to be a separate agent system as opposed to having to grind the grindy level 4 content to get to the interesting stuff.


I am pretty sure the main goal of this new mission line is to reach out to people who have locked themselves into leveling their raven. You won't reach these people if you don't put it right under their nose, breaking up the grind.


Exactly, I think a lot of the critical comments so far are because it isn't clear who these missions are aimed at. If it is the hard core L4 mission runners who are thinking that they don't know how to do PvP, this is a nice easy way to get them involved with some setpiece scenarios.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#137 - 2014-08-14 20:21:56 UTC
I assume they will require pointing?
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#138 - 2014-08-14 20:22:24 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:

green


you mean teal and grey
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#139 - 2014-08-14 20:29:19 UTC
voetius wrote:
Nam Dnilb wrote:
Matthias Azaharel wrote:
I really like this new direction for PvE content. Two things concern me:

1. As everyone and their grandmother's cat has already said, I would prefer this to be a separate agent system as opposed to having to grind the grindy level 4 content to get to the interesting stuff.


I am pretty sure the main goal of this new mission line is to reach out to people who have locked themselves into leveling their raven. You won't reach these people if you don't put it right under their nose, breaking up the grind.


Exactly, I think a lot of the critical comments so far are because it isn't clear who these missions are aimed at. If it is the hard core L4 mission runners who are thinking that they don't know how to do PvP, this is a nice easy way to get them involved with some setpiece scenarios.




Do these frigs need to be pointed? cause if not the fits I'm looking at are really specific for just the one role of smashing this other frig. Fits I wouldn't ever try to pvp in. To make it more like pvp the mission boss would have to change fits and we would not be given what ship it is at the start of the mission.
TigerXtrm
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#140 - 2014-08-14 20:33:52 UTC
Wait wait wait, so you want us, the capsuleers who are inexplicably bound by CONCORD's law and get an ass kicking the moment we over step, to fight and kill a bunch of terrorists who have managed to elude CONCORD and are using better equipment then even we have access to?

In any realistic scenario anyone would take two seconds to think that over and say HELL NO. But in this case, I think it's just another piece of bad story writing. All is good. (Really, put some more effort into decent background stories for game mechanics).

As far as the gameplay itself goes, I'm sure we all like the addition of new missions, but this is once again more static content that is able to be mapped and countered to perfection each and every time. Hell, the dev blog already gives a neat little list of exactly what each mission's dangers are. It will take 1 week tops before someone has all the details of each Burner written down and mapped out.

The reason missions in general are boring is not because there aren't enough different ones, but because it's the same stuff each and ever single time. The rats are always the same. The method of attack is always the same. The incoming damage is always the same. All you have to do to beat a mission is do the exact same thing you did last time.

If you want to improve missions and PVE content in general, start working on dynamic missions that change ever so slightly each time they are ran. Dynamic rats, dynamic triggers, dynamic damage and dynamic stats. That way at least there's still some challenge instead of being able to find every single piece of information on a website.

Of course a system like that takes time to program and stuff, I get that. But this basically goes for everything in EVE; make it less static.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums