These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Agent Shuffling - Get the NPC to move around

Author
Krops Vont
#21 - 2014-10-10 07:45:49 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
Instead of depletion one could use dynamic agent quality similar to system manufacturing index.

The more capsulers work with a single agent, the bigger workforce pool he has, so he starts lowering rewards.
On the other hand, less popular agents can start attracting capsulers by increasing rewards. Until they have enough people working for them.



This. Also some similar idea as far as no level of agent but quality based off standing? The better standing < reward.

--==Services==--

Propaganda/Art/Media

Wormhole Finding & Selling

o/ Play for fun

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#22 - 2014-10-10 08:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Krops Vont wrote:
To enlighten on this, (while stagnation is being tossed around more than your mom's drake), stagnation of agents led to what jita is. Having the move would probably spice up market hotspots. I would keep agents to their own relm of space though. You wouldn't want people who have -10 gallente standings and their agent poofs over to g-space.

Putting economic thought on this, limiting these blue collar jobs of shooting npc's for hire is bad for business. You have a bunch of construction workers that show up and shoot red crosses till the sun goes down with little interuption. I would suggest rather changing their location, they just deplete and refer you to another agent. Like a cool down after x many missions.

Why change it though? How much bear could a carebear bare if a carebear could care to bare?


There are already high class agents of one empire in their adversary's empire (take the Minmatar L4 Security agents in Madirmilire and Bahromab as example). So I don't see a problem with the agents move around other empires where this particular NPC corp already has stations installed, as well as into beacon places (Natural Phenomena, Abandoned Battlefields, etc.) to offer missions there. Explanations for that can range from replacement of secrete ops operators due to too much attention by the local empire's authority and thus reduced effectiveness of their work to the already mentioned checking out areas, which are currently lacking surveillance, to (in case of Distribution agents) the distribution of necessary good and equipment to local forces.

Depletion in combination with changing locations has already been brought up and I am not opposed to depletion; however, not at the expense of changing locations, as depletion does not tackle (as stated above) the problem of worthless systems.

Mission runners (and ratters by extension) (I don't like the term carebear) in every corner of the universe (High sec, Low sec, NPC 00 and (if it happens) Sov 00 mission runners) should be subject to the same requirement of mobility as other professions in EVE are.

The motivation for this change is in parts also due to egoistical desires: I don't like to go to particularly active mission hubs to run missions there; instead I like to run missions or do other PVE things in a more solitary fashion. Suitable systems for that, however, are rare. In the wake of this recently introduced concept of push (players away from each other) and pull (them together), this can apply here as well by pushing players out of established places and pull them together dynamically on temporary formed mission hubs, for instance, close to Incursions.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Krops Vont
#23 - 2014-10-10 08:27:26 UTC
ArrowI don't use carebear in a harmful way. The act of carebearing involves no player combat. Everyone does it.

ArrowChanging the amount of time it requires to play the game causes more and more to leave. High sec is the perfect amount for people with not that much time.

If it suddenly took 2 more hours to get the same amount of ISK, wouldn't you be a little tempered? Imagine the same idea why null sec shivered their timbers when the idea of MORE TIME to cross the universe came into picture.

Yea sure 2 more jumps for another agent takes 3 minutes in the T2 missonauder. Psychologically, it will feel like a lot more and pile on. Every second counts.

--==Services==--

Propaganda/Art/Media

Wormhole Finding & Selling

o/ Play for fun

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#24 - 2014-10-10 08:45:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Krops Vont wrote:
ArrowChanging the amount of time it requires to play the game causes more and more to leave. High sec is the perfect amount for people with not that much time.

If it suddenly took 2 more hours to get the same amount of ISK, wouldn't you be a little tempered? Imagine the same idea why null sec shivered their timbers when the idea of MORE TIME to cross the universe came into picture.

Yea sure 2 more jumps for another agent takes 3 minutes in the T2 missonauder. Psychologically, it will feel like a lot more and pile on. Every second counts.


I would not be muffled about that. I like the PVE content as what it should be: part of a living universe where less and less things remain static, as static content is not living. Instead, I would be, to some extend, curious about it. It's after all a new location, new systems, new neighborhood and you get to see something from the universe other than the area around Penirgman, Dresi, Osmon or Suroken.
It is also not like I had suggested the agents change their location on a daily basis; this would not make any sense as you usually don't switch jobs or job locations on a day-to-day basis. The players could still enjoy their daily PVE content for the larger part of weeks/months; however, at some point either allotted work for the agent has been cleared or objectives of the faction have been achieved and the agent either gets new work assigned in the same location or gets reassigned to other locations. A proper system for that would also have a notification system where the agent in question signalizes that their task or time here is about to end and maybe give a hint to 1-2 constellations where they are likely to be assigned to next. This way, players have plenty time to check these constellations out (via Dotlan or other geo-tools).

This "every second counts" mentality is also a thing that I like to see diminished as well. You play a game, or for me, you pursue a hobby - despite popular believe, EVE is still not a second job for which you pay instead of get paid. Players should enjoy their stay more and if it has to be encouraged by forced deceleration, a way to halt the grind a bit, it is absolutely working as intended by me. Which is not to say that players should not be allowed to grind if they want to grind, even with agent depletion and agent location shuffling, they can still do it.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#25 - 2014-10-10 14:36:07 UTC
Krops Vont wrote:
This. Also some similar idea as far as no level of agent but quality based off standing? The better standing < reward.


Your use of the mathematical symbol for less than is puzzling here at best and at it's worst shows a complete lack of understanding of how and why many people run missions.

If your intent is to indicate that higher standings should get greater rewards then we have no issue.

On the other hand if your intent here is to say that higher standing should get lower rewards then you are in fact blind to one of the major reasons why many people run missions. ISK is a major factor in running missions but then so is standing. Standing to lower taxes, standing to lower waste in reprocessing, standing to reduce waste in manufacturing etc and in my case those high standings and the ISK generated from missions are a pair of tools I can use to help new players in my corp. This idea simply turns that whole equation upside down, I get better standings to help them bu lower ISK, that does not work. Not to mention agents having to trust a brand new to him/her capsuleer with the most important or critical missions instead of giving them to one that has proven their worth over time makes no sense.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#26 - 2014-10-10 14:59:49 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I would not be muffled about that. I like the PVE content as what it should be: part of a living universe where less and less things remain static, as static content is not living. Instead, I would be, to some extend, curious about it. It's after all a new location, new systems, new neighborhood and you get to see something from the universe other than the area around Penirgman, Dresi, Osmon or Suroken.

Like it or not there are people in this game that enjoy the predictable nature of running mission for the same agent in the same system day after day. Why do you believe it is a requirement to destroy their game play when you can easily move around to different agents to accomplish your goal of new and different mission running experience. There is this wonderful tool in station called teh agent finder use it there is a universe full of lvl 4 agents that are waiting for you to come to them and experience all that they and there region of space has to offer.

As for the time element mentioned by several others. Why should I be forced to waste my game time moving to follow an agent/agents simply because you think that wasted time it is a great idea, or that it adds spice to the game? Again especially since the game already offers you the mechanic and the tools to achieve the same thing. All that is needed is the self discipline to actually make use of those tools and pack up and move. So mark your in game calendar and at the beginning of every month pack your stuff and move on down the road. There stagnation issue solved for you without affecting anyone else in the game.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#27 - 2014-10-10 15:03:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Donnachadh wrote:
Like it or not there are people in this game that enjoy the predictable nature of running mission for the same agent in the same system day after day. Why do you believe it is a requirement to destroy their game play when you can easily move around to different agents to accomplish your goal of new and different mission running experience. There is this wonderful tool in station called teh agent finder use it there is a universe full of lvl 4 agents that are waiting for you to come to them and experience all that they and there region of space has to offer.

As for the time element mentioned by several others. Why should I be forced to waste my game time moving to follow an agent/agents simply because you think that wasted time it is a great idea, or that it adds spice to the game? Again especially since the game already offers you the mechanic and the tools to achieve the same thing. All that is needed is the self discipline to actually make use of those tools and pack up and move. So mark your in game calendar and at the beginning of every month pack your stuff and move on down the road. There stagnation issue solved for you without affecting anyone else in the game.


Industrialists are already forced to do what you don't want to do in missions. Industrialists have already been stripped of their predictability in manufacturing. So have been miners. Explorer have always been subject to that kind of instability. Incursion runners as well. It is only natural that the remaining PVE parts follow that progression.

And you are ignoring things that I have brought up repeatedly and that I want to see fixed by this change. It's all in the first post.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Krops Vont
#28 - 2014-10-10 21:04:44 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
[quote=Krops Vont]This. Also some similar idea as far as no level of agent but quality based off standing? The better standing < reward.


Your use of the mathematical symbol for less than is puzzling here at best and at it's worst shows a complete lack of understanding of how and why many people run missions.

People run missions for income/free time or not enough time for anything else/fun/or RP

ArrowIf your intent is to indicate that higher standings should get greater rewards then we have no issue.

Yes that would be it... It makes sense. Big smile

--==Services==--

Propaganda/Art/Media

Wormhole Finding & Selling

o/ Play for fun

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#29 - 2014-10-10 22:31:05 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:

Like it or not there are people in this game that enjoy the predictable nature of running mission for the same agent in the same system day after day. Why do you believe it is a requirement to destroy their game play when you can easily move around to different agents to accomplish your goal of new and different mission running experience.


Pretty much everyone else has to do it.

Why do they get to be special snowflakes? Because they will fly into a rage if they have to do even the slightest thing differently? Sorry, EVE is not intended to cater to the mentally ill.

Nevermind that if you think actually having to do something different once in a while is "destroying their gameplay" then you're out of your mind. Being a hermit crab is not intended gameplay either.


Quote:
There stagnation issue solved for you without affecting anyone else in the game.


The stagnation issue *does* effect everyone else in the game, that's the point. You can't just scream some nonsense about calendars at me as though it solves the problem. It doesn't, you're just trying to get me to ignore the problem.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#30 - 2014-10-11 01:53:33 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Pretty much everyone else has to do it.

Does every other agent in the game except mine already do this rotating agents thingy? How did I get to be so important that CCP chose not to mess with my agents. Damn if I knew I had that much control I would have made other changes a long time ago.
But then it is more realistic that you are talking about the travel from agent to mission site, and if that is true then you have completely misunderstood, or you are deliberately misinterpreting what I say. Because the travel from agent to mission site is not what is being discussed here it is a random / semi random shifting of agents and the stations they are assigned to and it is this moving of agents that I am against.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Nevermind that if you think actually having to do something different once in a while is "destroying their gameplay" then you're out of your mind. Being a hermit crab is not intended gameplay either.

I do something different all the time, I do not like running the same missions all the time so I personally am constantly on the move from agent to agent. Normally I move about once every 3-4 weeks that is how I know for a fact that everything the OP is complaining about can be resolved by simply moving on to a different agent.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The stagnation issue *does* effect everyone else in the game, that's the point. You can't just scream some nonsense about calendars at me as though it solves the problem. It doesn't, you're just trying to get me to ignore the problem.

Bored with the same missions over and over, move to another agent in another system or area of space and you will get a new sub set of the available missions.
Want to see a new background when running your missions then move to another area of space and you will have a new background.
Don't like the ganker magnet bottle neck you may be flying through like Osmon then move to another system or another area of space. There are many agents out there and most of them are in areas that do not create or suffer from the ganker magnet bottle necks like Osmon.
In other words to eliminate all of these problems and many others all you have to do is the same thing this idea would force on everyone else. And that is to pack up and move to another system.
On the other hand if a player for whatever personal reasons wants to stay in the same system, running the same missions for the same agent for months/years how does that affect you? Especially when you can very easily pack up and move to change it all.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#31 - 2014-10-11 05:57:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Quote:
I do something different all the time, I do not like running the same missions all the time so I personally am constantly on the move from agent to agent. Normally I move about once every 3-4 weeks that is how I know for a fact that everything the OP is complaining about can be resolved by simply moving on to a different agent.


Please tell me how I am supposed to run missions in Ardishapur Prime or Jerhesh if I decided to live in either of these areas.
Please tell me why anyone should live in the first system (except for mining) and how they should make a living (except for mining, belts and other systems) to PVP in the latter system? You cannot solve any of my problems with simply "flying to another L4 agent" if there is none.

This suggestion is one way to make these and a wide range of other systems temporarily worth living in and, in case of Low sec, maybe even worth fighting over. It is aimed to disperse the players more and give mission runners a valid and understandable reason to fly around, not just "we don't want you to clump together and we want you to put your assets at risk without any further game-related meaning behind it" (as it is the case with Industry); instead PVE players get this occasionally moving agent (and other content) into new areas or anomalies in space for specific, game-related reasons everyone can relate to. Of course, in essence, it's the same as with industry, but at least there's a nicely designed cover blanketing the mere coding and game design decision, which gives event-related, system-statistics-related, backstory-related or otherwise ingame-event-related justification for the rotation.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Ix Method
Doomheim
#32 - 2014-10-11 09:28:42 UTC
Suggesting they deplete after x number of missions is slightly absurd in that it punishes activity. The central idea is solid though, I don't think it'd be at all unreasonable for agents to move around over a set period of time, perhaps a random timer of say 3-6 months or so - when their work is complete they get reassigned to another station.

If implemented correctly (ship hauler, etc. as stated above) shaking up this ridiculously stagnant system would be good for everyone, surely?

Travelling at the speed of love.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#33 - 2014-10-11 15:25:39 UTC
If a player that pays his subscription wants to stay in one place running mission for the same agent, mining the same belts whatever then I say good for them as long as they are enjoying themselves that is all that matters and it is all that should matter to anyone else. If these activities were causing a game breaking situation then I would alter that belief, however the nature of agents/missions has changed very little over time so it is hard to justify a change like this as a method of resolving a game breaking situation.

Even IF we accept your belief that this would be good for mission runners I am sure those who provide ships/ modules and ammo are going to hate this since it would require them to pack up and move along as well, thus increasing significantly their risks with no corresponding increase in rewards. So while your idea may solve a personal issue with one aspect of the game for you it creates problems for many other players in the process.

This was a bad idea when I first read it and it is still a bad idea.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#34 - 2014-10-11 16:15:13 UTC
Industry did not change for years, neither have Sovereignty or Mining. The first and the latter have been changed and are still being changed quite substantially. Sovereignty is on the way of being changed substantially. POS will soon be changed substantially. How we see Corporations and Alliances is going to be changed substantially. While I not necessarily agree with the changes in themselves, I agree with CCP and many others that things have to change.

Players can still run their missions for the exact same agent all the time, as the agents don't go away. You simply follow them and keep up the good work for them. Unless they switch into Low sec for one reason or another; then it is up to the players to follow them or change to another agent in order to avoid the risk. If such a good agent, however, goes to Low sec, they give people living there the potential to earn their living for a certain period of time. If you really like an agent (in a RP-like fashion), you can truly prove your value to them by following them around and taking on greater risks in order to complete tasks. In Low sec, you have increased payments, in High sec you get rewarded with potentially quieter locals and less attention from the preying eyes of gankers.

I also don't see how people doing the markets would hate it. It would certainly shake up established markets around existing mission hubs a little bit as some agents would leave the area, but others would come in. Furthermore, new hubs would temporarily form when some agents group together. This is already the case with Incursions in remote areas (such as Solitude, Devoid, Derelik, Genesis or Khanid: people go there and set up their orders to support the local Incursions fleets. This dynamic market development would be strengthened with roaming around agents. They get rewarded with better profits and some exclusivity in the area. Local producers also potentially find a more direct sales market for their products instead of carrying their products to big hubs.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Previous page12