Missions & Complexes

when I decline bad missions I get burner missions, which are the good ones.

It all depends on your standing with the Agent.

With high standing, Agents will offer more rewarding missions that are nearer to their location - thus more ISK, less jumps.

In my opinion that mission pool is based on missions previously accepted and completed.



DMC

Whenever I first start out with a new security Agent, I get offered both Anti-Pirate and Anti-Empire encounter missions. Since I don't want to incur negative Faction standings, I always decline the Anti-Empire encounter missions. After my standing raises with the Agent, I no longer get offered Anti-Empire missions. The Anti-Pirate encounter missions being offered are the larger more rewarding ones such as Blockade, Extravaganza, Pirate Invasion, Angel / Guristas Strike, Gone Berserk, etc. Also the mission locations are usually within the Agent's system, at the most 1 jump away.

I don't have any empyrical data either. My opinion is based from my experience running missions and viewing my standings / transaction logs. That's why I said with high Agent standing, Agents will offer more rewarding missions that are nearer to their location and their mission pool is based on missions previously accepted and completed.

I have very high standings with all Empire Factions. The only negative Faction standings I have are with Pirate Factions. Maybe that's a contributing factor.


DMC

I like to do Mining Misappropriation, Recon, Blockade, Damsel, Angels ex, Dread Pirate Scarlet, Gone Berserk, a few more but I hate The Anomaly, Duo of Death and ones that take too much time for little LP and Isk.

One time I declined a mission and the next mission was 6 jumps away in Low sec, I could just say I have bad luck, I run 2 accounts both with the same agent and it seems to happen to both of them.

My theory still stands

My agent standings fluctuate wildly from -1.0 to all the way up to 4.0

I can not say that I've noticed any patterns at all. Even have a list of 80 missions accepted/decline with agent standings after each mission. It's not enough data to be called empirical but theres no pattern. I get blockade at high and at negative standings as well as angel, bezerk, assault, Damsel, mordus, recon etc.

Without data any patterns you see is purely subjective and suffers from selective memory and confirmation bias (and various other buzzwords).

Also theres maybe around 35 missions that can be offered NOT including burners. You'd need a very large sample size with agent standings, faction standings and corp standings before and after each mission to make any kind of statement regarding there being a specific pattern.

Essentially this has been my experience as well.
I spend a lot of time running missions with new / newer players using the same agent. The ones they draw tend to be the less desirable missions while mine tend to be the more desirable variety. I have no evidence other than many years of experience having this happen repeatedly over time and many different agenst and NPC I have often wondered if there was not some form of bias going on based on standings. On a related note I have noticed that when I rely on my faction standing to gain access to agents instead of agent standings the missions tend to be of the lower quality at first and then improve as my agent standings improve.

I guess all of this could be the twisting winds of fate and the random number generation but I am not convinced of that.

First off, the location of the mission that you are given has FAR more to do with the location of the agent within their constellation than anything else. If you mission in a dead-end system, you're on the edge of a constellation and you'll almost always have to make at least one jump, sometimes 2, sometimes 3. If that 3rd jump is a low-sec system... that's the way it goes. On the other hand, if you're in the middle of the constellation with more than just 1 adjoining system, then usually it's zero, 1, or at most 2 jumps.

As far as good vs. bad missions... I think that's completely relative to one's perception. When standings are low you can only pull low level missions. As you blaze through them you see precisely the quantity of good vs. less good missions. What are the 'good' missions? The ones with high LP and high bounties of course (i.e. battleships). ...you can't get those until you have high standings and are able to pull L4s.

That said... in my experience, the part of space that you are in and the corporation of the agent seem to have an effect on what missions you receive. While I'm still missioning in Amarr space, I'm now working for a Caldari corp... when I was working for an Amarrian corp a few months back I used to get Mining Misappropriation allll the time (love that mission - such excellent bounties!), but since I've changed corps and moved 8 jumps away, I haven't received it once. I'm also receiving less Sansha and more Blood Raider missions (also annoying!).

So... good mission vs. bad mission: depends on your corp and your location, not on your standings or the faction that you're running missions for. I used to get much better missions, with the same standings, with the other corp (that has a terrible LP store!!!) than I do now.

My current record of consecutive burner missions offered stands at 16... my resolve was sorely tested that day.

I think 16 is my record of consecutive burner missions completed. Dread Pirate Scarlett must have had the day off or something.

I'm really kidding, I'd never actually keep that stat, but if someone wants to go through my mission logs?

If you were a real mission runner you would be using 5461321587 alt accounts to pull your missions for you and couldn't care less what missions you decline

Just kidding. Get your faction standings over 5.0 and then who cares how many you decline, just stay over -2 agent wise.