Warfare & Tactics

Agreed I also like this idea. Simple and easy solution. I like!

Doing this will result in more pvp in plexes, however it does not solve the problem of people completely disinterested in pvp still siphoning off the unique rewards intended for those in fw.

So conclusion is that now no one is not able to pvp because horrible farmers lowered their income and now they have to farm 3 times more missions to get rich, did i get it right?

I wonder how people managed to pvp before fw missions got 1st boost.

You are just used to fly too expensive ships if you can not afford to pvp with 100m/ hour or more earnings.

Then the problem lies in FW nto the missions. When looking to change missions you need to examine how other missions work as well.

Sanctums / 0.0 stuff - yes alliances generate more lucrative santums,etc however anyone can run these
in NPC space anyone can run them

Missions (in high and null sec) can be done solo. True solo, not dual box. The risk are the same and I would argue the pirate missions are OP as far as the reward.

Almost all missions in high and null are less then 3 jumps from the starting point. By removing missions all together from Lowsec you remove one of the most important aspects of the game isk. By limiting rewards to plexes only makes it a team effort to generate isk as well as you make it difficult to earn isk. THis is a problem because two things occur:

1) People that are pirate and FW must have an alt to be able to generate isk if missioning in high sec / incursions/whatever
2) You send more people into 0.0 to simply farm sanctums and thus remove more people from FW.

I would much rather have people in lowsec for the possible pvp rather then tell them to leave and go earn isk somewhere else.

I think your idea of adding LP rewards to plexes/conquering gives a REASON to plex and fight for control which IS the problem in FW. However removing FW missions would severly chop the head off of FW.

And for the record I am not a billionare isk plowing FW running person. I am not in FW (I do plan to come back) I simply do not want to see a key componet of each sec system drastically changed for what you say would be the better and then find out it severly hurts lowsec in general.

That is why I say make the conquering systems influence how missions can be done, this makes everyone work to keep there isk faucet open. By simply removing the faucet does not mean you fixed the problem. (lack of pvp)

Nope, you got it wrong again.

No one said that it prevents us from PvPing, we're saying it slows down PvP. It nerfs one of the incomes that was designed to sustain Faction Warfare.

The point of missions is to provide high rewards (at increased risk) to FW pilots so they can support constant PvP.

The more time people come and farm the missions and take the isk elsewhere, the longer we have to grind to be able to support PvP. That does NOTHING to help the FW scene, it just slows everything down.

Seriously, stop throwing down straw man arguments. You take everything someone in here says and take it to the extreme so you can refute it. Actually listen to what people are posting if you're going to keep replying.

As long as the hunter get some kind of reward for failing missions, I'm fine with it. But then, missions just start looking like plexes with choke points (agents who give missions) that enemy blobs can camp.

If you want to keep missions in the game, have them count towards system occupancy, in what way do they differ from plexes?

Chatgris has it right. If missions are to be made functionally equivalent to plexes, why even have a distinction? I'm assuming it would be far easier to code them out and assign some sort of benefit system to plexes instead of trying to invent some sort of way for people to cause you to fail your mission.

So reason why you cry is that you have to grind more missions to get isk for stupidly lost carriers?

Come on, you greedy whiner.

In order to cap missions CCP would also have to sort out the navy aggression of friendlies.

I've previously suggested that missions be replaced by plexes, in a similar way to chatgris, but with the added suggestion that agents assign plex capture missions.



http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1219869&page=3#65

or, more verbosely



http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1520969&page=1#3

Yes we all see you are here for defending your own income.

I say missions are fine as they are now when balancing mechanics affects income.

It is not only FW missions that affects income you get from lp, most higsec missions give mostly same items, so nerfing only fw missions does not bring lp price up enough on level where it was at the beginning.

Main reason why isk/lp was high when fw got boost was that ccp banned 6000+ rmt guys.

Edit: also now when people have lot of unused lp example some federation navy tags has gone up approx 3,5m/tag , so if you do certain fw plexes and loot those tags you can do quite much isk/day.