Missions & Complexes

Mobile cyno inhibitor

adding PVE that requires carriers is way too high a skillcap.

requiring a carrier + skills to do Null PVE is kin of a joke, i think nerfing L4 in null to be able to do in PVP ships is the go forward (if its broken at all.

I think once the SOE products reach equilibriam (more sperging mission runners go there) this whole thing will blow over.

Not markets like SOE that are in huge demand and have a relatively wide distribution.


Income will come via taxing for things such as using infrastructure. A little more incentive to go live in the space you own.


It can. A small gang of 5 pvp fitted ships is very efficient at running missions.

SOE LP has been steady for years, the sum of isk required to crash that market would be gigantic to the point of making the ice interdictions look cheap and the effect only temporary, a week or two at best. Nobody has pockets that deep.





Entirely possible, sig tanking combined with a rep works but you will take a hit isk/hr doing so. Running around in a small gang is more ideal as it provides dedicated logi, more firepower and the ability to respond to threats more effectively.

Rough estimate ~50b a day in SoE stuff trade in jita.

not rough estimate because I got curious, so includes Astero, Stratios, virtue implants, core/combat probes + launchers (12 items total, copy/pasted from in game to excel). Average daily SoE trade over the last year: 83,693,614,468.02

now I suppose I should go backwards on that and figure out how much LP that was
dividing by typical isk/lp ratios it looks like around 40-50mil LP/day. (obviously inaccurate as who knows how many were sold a second time, it not more, I assume most of the buy orders are people that are going to try and resell)

You know I don't think it would actually be all that hard to crash. Just throwing some fraction of the total volume could drop prices which should further drop prices as people undercut and could even lead to firesales further dropping price. I can imagine goons going on a mission running op and having 1000 people in each of the SoE hubs all running missions, but what does that really end up accomplishing and what is the payoff? And of course players will be able to switch to other corps. SoE is nice because it is braindead easy to convert lp, and you even get a good rate.

If alliance level income mostly moves to personal income perhaps in many ways the expenses can also go down. A lot of the infrastructure costs seem to be there as isk sinks. perhaps the next design can move the sinks/taxes more to a personal level. although something like you have to pay a million isk every time you want to dock would just get annoying.

and the ishtar is pretty strong at soloing missions. Small gangs sound like overkill. lately I've been tempted to try null missions in a cloaky interdiction nullfied t3, but I'm also lazy. A t1 cruiser could probably blitz level 3s alright.



I don't think that I'd want to see blitzing completely removed. The longer you sit in one place the more likely you are to end up dead and would imo hurt low/null mission running. And sitting around shooting NPCs is well boring. Although making it too easy to blitz isn't really a good thing either. It is very specific style of blitzing in a small set of specific locations with the addition of burners that puts you over 200m/hour.

My initial idea is to balance missions around sec bands. so high/low/null. Probably put highsec at around the payout received in a 0.7 system. which would be a decent sized LP nerf. I'd also normalize burners to be in constellation and probably nerf the bonus payout, and maybe even the bounty. Both of these are a kick in the nuts to blitzing but I don't think will affect regular mission runners too much. It would also open up pretty much every agent and make them all about similar in terms of desirability with people mostly choosing based on constellation layout and LP stores.

Low and null I'm tempted to say balance around the lower possible sec, and keep the 50% bonus LP and current bounties on burners.

A full pve rework sounds like it could very well be a good thing, but seems like it would take a lot of time and effort.

there is also the option to make standings matter and have declines be far more punishing then they are now. imo 99% of the current standings mechanics are a joke.

Overall this thread is totally illogical.

Claimed issue: People make too much out of SOE missioning

Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items

Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere

Whilst that would work, i am not 100% sure how it gels with the "higher risk higher reward" equation for which EVE is famous.

It also doesn't help people in renter space as there are no agents there.

You can probs spend 2-3 weeks training to get into a cruiser L4 My idea would be it can be done on cyno alts, etc.minimum SP. plant alts in mission pockets.

The risk is still there, if its cheap more ppl will do it & more pvp will happen as a result.


the argument "null is fine for missions" is rubbish, people suggesting it have never left highsec.

People dont do many L4 missions in null & low, coz the ships required to complete them are terrible in PVP situations (hint: everything is PVP in low/null). Nerfing the Incoming dmg to make them able to be completed with PVP cruisers would put alot more people out there doing them.

then the players still staying in hisec with there bling ships can still make isk with missions & so can nullsec.

thats nice, what about Angel extravaganza? or are those meant to be skipped for burner only?

Which system offers only Burner missions?

You can if you like, regardless you wont be able to chain them together without ruining standings.

you seem a little upset, it would suck to have to rely on missions to plex accounts. i pity you.

I imagine with 3 alts there sharing missions & standings it would be negated somewhat.