These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#401 - 2014-08-28 08:17:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
Burner mission i got, but declined it not worth doing even with good standings, rewards are not good:
http://www.netsky.org/burnerTQ.png

Lol

I have all social skills trained to 5 and have 10.0 standings to agent that i tested burning missions on TQ.
So i guess this is the best reward you get.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#402 - 2014-08-28 10:31:00 UTC
Foxglove Digitalis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#403 - 2014-08-28 11:24:48 UTC
Sensor damps appear to have no effect on the Sansha burner.

That is unless a sucky can maintain lock at 30km with 6x max skilled range scripted meta 4 dampeners? (2x keres).
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#404 - 2014-08-28 13:21:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
Foxglove Digitalis wrote:
Sensor damps appear to have no effect on the Sansha burner.

They are EW immune.
I tested it out with full level 5 skills, t-2 jammers, t-2 ecm frigs, and other t-2 ew frigs, NO Effect.
Shadowwalker Fox
the brotherhood of eternal
#405 - 2014-08-28 15:15:55 UTC
Would be interesting if there were some kind of LVL5 version of these burner missions.
jackudza
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#406 - 2014-08-28 20:41:29 UTC
Spc One wrote:
Foxglove Digitalis wrote:
Sensor damps appear to have no effect on the Sansha burner.

They are EW immune.
I tested it out with full level 5 skills, t-2 jammers, t-2 ecm frigs, and other t-2 ew frigs, NO Effect.


Jammers are perfectly work on the Burners. If it is jammed it flies away over 80-120km. Checked this on sisi 2 days ago.
All missions doable in T2 fitted assault/faction frigates.
Eagerly waiting for cruiser size missions!
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#407 - 2014-08-28 22:34:35 UTC
T2 cruiser missions is guaranteed gg for the burner. every time.
Hitman 001
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#408 - 2014-08-29 23:48:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Hitman 001
/
Shkiki
MastersCraft
#409 - 2014-08-31 17:37:50 UTC
This is win.
Mark Prag
American Policy Institute.
#410 - 2014-09-02 22:24:49 UTC
Carniflex wrote:
[quote=Mark Prag][quote=Carniflex][quote=Trevor Eve]

Battleships are used for majority of Lev 4 missions currently because they do them the fastest on average. They are the "to earn as much as little of time as possible...". That out of the way there is a number of Lev 4 missions that are better done in something smaller. So some people just pick the best tool for the job to the point of having different pirate BS's fitted and ready to go in their missionrunning station of choice for the 1-2 minute difference they make against a more general purpose hull/fit. Say, for example, having both Nightmare and Marachiel and using Nightmare against EM weak missions. Sure you can lose a bit effectivity for particular hull because hulls benefiting from different hardwires but at the end of a gaming session you might have done few more missions than the guy with just a single ship.




Sure, Nightmares would do great against specific mission rats, and the Machariel would do great against a plethora of other rats on account of swapping damage types.... however it's my honest opinion that the Loki or Tengu is preferred. For the 1.2b or so for a Nightmare or machariel hull, you can put together a level four capable t3, with fittings, and do perfectly fine. Survivability is greater than a battleship as you aren't taking full damage from all rats on account of having a larger hull, and you mitigate alot of your damage simply by going 700ms+. Using medium weapons you do full damage to battleships and increased damage to frigates compared to Large guns/Torps.... add to the fact you're using missiles or projectile weapons, one is able to switch out damage types for all races. Increased mobility in a smaller ship means, provided one has a great tank, to close with and bring short range/high DPS on your target, and literally melt through the opposition. Extensive testing of different ships, different fits.... I've not seen anything greater in time/efficiency in comparison with the Tengu, seconded by the Loki.

Although I will agree with the fact that the Nightmare has no equal now, for being the fastest battleship [sorry Machariel, aka Spacefish] in the game and it just MIGHT be able to mitigate damage from opposing battleships by going just so fast..... might have to test it out and see how it stacks up against Sansha/Blood.

In other news, trolling this forum post..... if you fellas want to see cruiser and BC and BS burner missions, show your support of the what's on offer, instead of complaining it's not to your liking NOW..... Last I checked, CCP doesn't own Burger King, so don't expect that 'Made your way, right away' maxim our Nordic Game Masters
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#411 - 2014-09-04 19:36:57 UTC
Mark Prag wrote:
Carniflex wrote:
[quote=Mark Prag][quote=Carniflex][quote=Trevor Eve]

Battleships are used for majority of Lev 4 missions currently because they do them the fastest on average. They are the "to earn as much as little of time as possible...". That out of the way there is a number of Lev 4 missions that are better done in something smaller. So some people just pick the best tool for the job to the point of having different pirate BS's fitted and ready to go in their missionrunning station of choice for the 1-2 minute difference they make against a more general purpose hull/fit. Say, for example, having both Nightmare and Marachiel and using Nightmare against EM weak missions. Sure you can lose a bit effectivity for particular hull because hulls benefiting from different hardwires but at the end of a gaming session you might have done few more missions than the guy with just a single ship.




Sure, Nightmares would do great against specific mission rats, and the Machariel would do great against a plethora of other rats on account of swapping damage types.... however it's my honest opinion that the Loki or Tengu is preferred. For the 1.2b or so for a Nightmare or machariel hull, you can put together a level four capable t3, with fittings, and do perfectly fine. Survivability is greater than a battleship as you aren't taking full damage from all rats on account of having a larger hull, and you mitigate alot of your damage simply by going 700ms+. Using medium weapons you do full damage to battleships and increased damage to frigates compared to Large guns/Torps.... add to the fact you're using missiles or projectile weapons, one is able to switch out damage types for all races. Increased mobility in a smaller ship means, provided one has a great tank, to close with and bring short range/high DPS on your target, and literally melt through the opposition. Extensive testing of different ships, different fits.... I've not seen anything greater in time/efficiency in comparison with the Tengu, seconded by the Loki.


Although I will agree with the fact that the Nightmare has no equal now, for being the fastest battleship [sorry Machariel, aka Spacefish] in the game and it just MIGHT be able to mitigate damage from opposing battleships by going just so fast..... might have to test it out and see how it stacks up against Sansha/Blood.

In other news, trolling this forum post..... if you fellas want to see cruiser and BC and BS burner missions, show your support of the what's on offer, instead of complaining it's not to your liking NOW..... Last I checked, CCP doesn't own Burger King, so don't expect that 'Made your way, right away' maxim our Nordic Game Masters



if you need to try to speed tank a level 4 in a bs you are doing it wrong.
CW Itovuo
The Executioners
#412 - 2014-09-10 04:21:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Neuting these NPCs won't have any effect, unfortunately.

Although these NPCs will be using some improved tactics compared to other NPCs they still rely on the same back-end. However simultaneous work is being performed on improving our NPC and content creation tools, and these missions will serve as excellent testing grounds for future NPC advancements.

I definitely understand the desire of many people to be able to run these missions at will, but unfortunately these missions will simply be too good to make them available all the time. I really like the idea of doing something with long cooldowns like the epic arcs in a future iteration, thanks for that feedback.


Burner missions sounded interesting.

Frigate combat sounded compelling.

Ran up to hisec to get in touch w/ my L4 agents. Checked with a number of them. No "burners" available.


Research the forums... read the above post.

Hooray. Waste of time. Back to my normal digs.

Evil
Hakuuna Matata
Data Core Inc.
#413 - 2014-09-10 22:23:49 UTC
Well, I have no illusions that my opinion is going to mean anything in this big world, but here goes anyway: What's the point of these burner missions? I did a few, didn't get any good, lost some expensive ships, didn't get any descent stuff... did I mention I didn't get any stuff.

Sorry CCP, I really liked the idea, but if two faction fitted faction frigs have great difficulty killing these rats and there are no rewards, what's the point. How about risk - reward thing or something remotely like it.

And please, don't tell me that there is a chance of a drop, it's this kind of crap that made me stop running anomalies in 0.0. The rewards are just not ofsetting the risks.

So, my mission alts will go back to raping the good old boring level IV's. All the hard work CCP put in this new content for naught...

Fly safe y'all

Hak
ISquishWorms
#414 - 2014-09-11 12:35:29 UTC
Finally I lost some ships doing some level four missions and it felt good. Lol

I like the concept behind these missions, there is room as in anything for improvment but they are a good starting point.

As others have pointed out I think that the rewards should perhaps be a little more (but perhaps if doing this limit them to being done solo), it would also be nice to be able to use effective EW.

‘No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh’.

Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#415 - 2014-09-13 04:51:52 UTC
Juliet DiMarco
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#416 - 2014-09-13 23:01:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Juliet DiMarco
So far the missions aren't any more exciting than regular L4s once a player realizes the solution is “look up fit, use strategy X every time.” A large time investment filtering through regular missions is required to pull the burners, which makes testing them a pain outside of sisi. The current iterations aren't even an intro to PvP for missioners – the skills picked up in these don’t translate at all to an actual fighting scenario. A high-sec player who thinks this is what Eve PvP is may actually be even more discouraged from venturing into low or null as a result of trying these out.

Instead of taking the (mandatory) uber-specialized fit to a handful of burner agents, like a bounty hunter looking for an ideal target, players have to weed through the same boring mission pool that even new players can’t wait to disassociate themselves from. Players interested in frigate missions now need to make sure they always have a BS/Marauder/T3 nearby for when they exhaust declining the regular mission offers. Any excitement I initially had to go fight these new rats and test fits against them on TQ went out the door by tying them to the existing mission pool. Is the idea, then, to start fleeting up for high-sec missioning to increase the pull-rate? I remember the paltry income from blitzing L4s solo. Outside of asking in local if someone is sitting in a frigate ready to go help me fight a burner these probably aren’t going to convince me to start fleeting up with buddies while running missions. I don't want to live out of a single station or make sure I have 5 additional frigates on-hand wherever I find myself running missions, either.

Given the fact that the issues with EWAR immunity are technical in nature and cannot be addressed, payouts have not adjusted to compensate for investment requirements, and the horrible mission-draw implementation, I’m hoping these missions don’t eat up future development resources. There are too many larger problems in Eve that need to be addressed, and it’s clear nobody at CCP knows how to create an engaging and fun PvE system. I’m fearful for future burner missions where a capsuleer needs to complete a hacking mini-game to access a special acceleration gate, kill a rat before he smartbombs the player from 80km, and the dropped loot launches out of the wreck at 5km/s.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#417 - 2014-09-14 09:39:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
oh wow. just heard about logi npc frigates in burner missions.

I see them getting left behind by kite-y burners.

if the burner AI is smart enough to stay in range of reps, then tackle the logi to kill the kiting. curious to see if the burner will still pull range, or stay.

is worth testing

any chance we could see T2 logi frigates? frigate wormholes and burner missions: new gameplay driven by the requirement to fit your gang through a keyhole (a very small means of travel, via accel gate or wh mass limits)