These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

LvL 4 FW Mission Imbalance: Issue?

First post First post
Author
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
#221 - 2014-07-29 16:28:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Deacon Abox
Cearain wrote:
You might think amarr rats wouldn't shoot amarr militia either. But the rats are almost as bad as the players at shooting their own team.

Apparently all the faction rats hate capsuleers of their own allegiance. Also, apparently, this is working as (un)intended, so it will stay that way in perpetuity.P

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#222 - 2014-07-29 21:02:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
Veskrashen wrote:
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:

In the thread there were some that claimed a SB was slower than a T3. Can I get an explanation on that? I've tried to fit a(any) t3 to be able to 500-550 dps at 70km, warp cloaked at 5.5au/s all before implant and have been coming up short.


Cloaky ham tengu can get a little over 500dps - I suppose you could go faction bcs for a bit more. Not really sure what benefit there is though, it's definitely not quicker overall because you spend much more time warping around.

Fit a Grav Cap subsystem - you get 4.9 AU/sec, and better align times than a bomber. Same / better travel time on average.

And yes, Cal / MIn / Amarr missions are still far too easy for the risk / ship investment. The fact that Gallente LP store values are still as high as they are even after us being in Tier 3 for so long and Tier 4 for several days should give a hint at how much less they are run in comparison.



thanks for the info. I had no intention of hanging up my bomber. and hams have bad range when you always start 50-100km off along with beacon change cant land cloaked anymore.

eft on the tengu is giving me only 0.6 sec faster align time for 0.6au/s slower than the bomber so more than likely a wash.

I guess I just really like hitting at 70 km with navy torps (start shooting as soon as I land). find that's the biggest time waster in missions, moving to the target.

edit: also 60 mil is nice and easy to replace if I fall asleep at the pc while running missions although this happens less now that I have to pay attention in a mission and not use a tp vigil to speed tank it.
Moglarr
Operation Meatshield
#223 - 2014-07-30 02:58:40 UTC
"If you find one factions missions are too easy, perhaps you should join that faction."

In seriousness, I don't run missions much. However, I think it is interesting, and cool, that different factions would have different flavours and play styles required to complete their missions. Which makes sense considering the different technologies each factions employ against their enemies.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#224 - 2014-07-30 06:16:06 UTC
Removed some off topic posts.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Miriya Zakalwe
World Wide Welp
#225 - 2014-07-30 11:36:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Miriya Zakalwe
Deerin wrote:
Miriya Zakalwe wrote:
Mission running is completely orthogonal to the problems facing FW. Totally unrelated.


Then make it unrelated. Remove tier bonuses from mission LP payouts.

Or make it totally related. Get rid of all current FW missions and make the agents give plex capture missions.

Right now it benefits from bonuses while contributing nothing to warzone, No sir. If you want to reap the benefits of FW, please come and join the fight with your main, not with your 2 month old SB alt.


You seem to be confused. Tiers have less to do with warzone control than they do with reinforcing systems. As posted above, it is possible to control nearly all systems in the war zone and still be at tier 1.

Tiers are gained by donating to ihubs. Disproportionately, when compared to the effect of capturing systems, which you would know, had you done it. This is usually done by mission runners (and to a lesser extent, plexers) so I would say that the missions are working as intended, tier-wise.

Nice try, though.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#226 - 2014-07-30 18:44:23 UTC
Miriya Zakalwe wrote:
Deerin wrote:
Miriya Zakalwe wrote:
Mission running is completely orthogonal to the problems facing FW. Totally unrelated.


Then make it unrelated. Remove tier bonuses from mission LP payouts.

Or make it totally related. Get rid of all current FW missions and make the agents give plex capture missions.

Right now it benefits from bonuses while contributing nothing to warzone, No sir. If you want to reap the benefits of FW, please come and join the fight with your main, not with your 2 month old SB alt.


You seem to be confused. Tiers have less to do with warzone control than they do with reinforcing systems. As posted above, it is possible to control nearly all systems in the war zone and still be at tier 1.

Tiers are gained by donating to ihubs. Disproportionately, when compared to the effect of capturing systems, which you would know, had you done it. This is usually done by mission runners (and to a lesser extent, plexers) so I would say that the missions are working as intended, tier-wise.

Nice try, though.



You can't get to tier 5 if you only have one system. The amount of lp you have to spend to hit higher tiers decreases as you gain more systems. I think it's misleading to argue there is a disconnect between warzone control and tiers.

I do not really care too much what ccp does with fw missions. But to the extent missions remain a much easier way to get the same lp as plexing then plexing and tiers will be of little interest. On the other hand if they removed missions entirely there would be more interest in plexing and tiers. But you would also likely see the warzone become even more lopsided.

It might be that you can make about 50% of the lp from plexing. But that likely assumes oplexing. When you get to higher tiers its much harder since generally you have fewer systems to offensive plex effeciently.

The economic factors do indeed effect the war. Its not a motivator for everyone, and it motivates some more than others. But it is not correct to think people are "either" in faction war solely for the isk or they are in it solely for some other reason.

Making missions effect system control is just caving in and endorsing fw as pure pve.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#227 - 2014-07-30 19:24:22 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Miriya Zakalwe wrote:
Deerin wrote:
Miriya Zakalwe wrote:
Mission running is completely orthogonal to the problems facing FW. Totally unrelated.


Then make it unrelated. Remove tier bonuses from mission LP payouts.

Or make it totally related. Get rid of all current FW missions and make the agents give plex capture missions.

Right now it benefits from bonuses while contributing nothing to warzone, No sir. If you want to reap the benefits of FW, please come and join the fight with your main, not with your 2 month old SB alt.


You seem to be confused. Tiers have less to do with warzone control than they do with reinforcing systems. As posted above, it is possible to control nearly all systems in the war zone and still be at tier 1.

Tiers are gained by donating to ihubs. Disproportionately, when compared to the effect of capturing systems, which you would know, had you done it. This is usually done by mission runners (and to a lesser extent, plexers) so I would say that the missions are working as intended, tier-wise.

Nice try, though.



You can't get to tier 5 if you only have one system. The amount of lp you have to spend to hit higher tiers decreases as you gain more systems. I think it's misleading to argue there is a disconnect between warzone control and tiers.

I do not really care too much what ccp does with fw missions. But to the extent missions remain a much easier way to get the same lp as plexing then plexing and tiers will be of little interest. On the other hand if they removed missions entirely there would be more interest in plexing and tiers. But you would also likely see the warzone become even more lopsided.

It might be that you can make about 50% of the lp from plexing. But that likely assumes oplexing. When you get to higher tiers its much harder since generally you have fewer systems to offensive plex effeciently.

The economic factors do indeed effect the war. Its not a motivator for everyone, and it motivates some more than others. But it is not correct to think people are "either" in faction war solely for the isk or they are in it solely for some other reason.

Making missions effect system control is just caving in and endorsing fw as pure pve.


So many statements, so little point.
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#228 - 2014-08-01 08:23:12 UTC
I will say that there is an imbalance in the missions. Caldari and Minmatar NPCs missile spam making running missions impossible for amarr/gallente bombers that wish to run them (IMO bombers shouldn't be able to solo FW LVL 4's regardless of faction). Another frustrating issue is EWAR from both gallente and caldari NPCs (damps and ecm). You can either be running the mission or just entered trying to catch a mission runner and you will be permajammed or damped to upwards of 1 min locktimes/under 10km lock ranges making any kind of action take ages. I'd either like to see all FW missions increase in difficulty, making it a group activity and be unsoloable or the other side of the coin is make all missions have missile spam and remove/reduce significantly annoying ewar.
Mabego Tetrimon
Spiritus Draconis
#229 - 2014-08-02 00:55:32 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
I don't see many FW people mentioning that these missions are still far too profitable and too easy, risk-free bombers or not.
and on with tears....

tears, SC tears, love that