These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

PvE missions determined by PvP?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cancel Align NOW
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#81 - 2014-11-27 01:06:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Cancel Align NOW
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
In before the thread move to Missions and Complexes :D

Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
If you successfully complete a level 4 mission for the Sisters of EVE, you might get 1m ISK and 8000 LP (worth about 12m-16m ISK today).


but .. SOE LP is protected by divine intervention and their ISK/LP ratio is immutable and indestructible :D

btw - you can get almost 15,000 SOE LP at Lanngisi for some Burner missions which is enough for a 40 mill probe in just one mission.

Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:

Perhaps it's time for missions specifically designed to be messed with by other players. Like missions that are given to two players at once and in some manner as "who gets to something/there/from somewhere first" ?


ummhh ... like in incursions ???


If incursions:
1. didn't have system effects
2. could be declined by the mission agent
3. have different objectives, eg rescue the gallente soliders from the damaged ship before a caldari pilot destroys it. eg defend the starbase from amarr slavers and any associated amarr pilots
4. gave LP to different corporations
5. could be done one vs one

then if you ignore all of that I suppose yeah Herzog's idea is the same as incursions.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#82 - 2014-11-27 01:09:36 UTC
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
In before the thread move to Missions and Complexes :D

Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
If you successfully complete a level 4 mission for the Sisters of EVE, you might get 1m ISK and 8000 LP (worth about 12m-16m ISK today).


but .. SOE LP is protected by divine intervention and their ISK/LP ratio is immutable and indestructible :D

btw - you can get almost 15,000 SOE LP at Lanngisi for some Burner missions which is enough for a 40 mill probe in just one mission.

Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:

Perhaps it's time for missions specifically designed to be messed with by other players. Like missions that are given to two players at once and in some manner as "who gets to something/there/from somewhere first" ?


ummhh ... like in incursions ???



Back when incursions were just live events, in the days of Olde when live events were unplanned, spontaneous, and epic, there were some players who sided with Sansha.


When incursions became the canned, monetized, geriatric, predictable ISK Fountain for bitter nullsecers content that we know of it today, the Sansha sympathizers got screwed over.

It would have been great if they could at least get missions from Sansha incursion NPCs or if a system would have pro-Sansha sites that they could participate in. Such that if the pro Sansha players were grining sites better than the anti-Sansha forces, the Mothership NEVER appeared.
And only the one side that was victorious ultimately would be getting LP rewards. Failed to beat Sansha and kill the mother? NO LP for you! But the pro-Sansha players would get Sansha LP or maybe some special anti-concord LP that could be swapped for other pirate LPs? Of course if the mom got popped then the pro-empire players would get their reward and the Sansha players not.

And yes, perhaps some sites where they went head to head.

So yes, definitely incursions. I have been saying for years that so much content potential was overlooked with Incursions that it's practically a tragedy.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#83 - 2014-11-27 01:23:49 UTC
Although I don't feel too bad for the OP, I think the people that say "PvP is everywhere" miss an important point.

Intent.

When I sell salvage on the market the intent is my gain. There is no intent to harm others, just help myself. The way some players are making their point is akin to saying, "Because you are breathing air you are denying air from someone else." Not true.

Players need to separate action from intent. It is what separates "playing the game" and "griefing".

What the OP ran into could be one of those borderline cases. If the other player was denying the resource for their own gain, fair play. If they were using the item to try and force a newer player into an unfair fight...

Luckily these decisions are up to CCP and not the player base.
Cancel Align NOW
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2014-11-27 01:39:13 UTC
Nexus Day wrote:
Although I don't feel too bad for the OP, I think the people that say "PvP is everywhere" miss an important point.

Intent.

When I sell salvage on the market the intent is my gain. There is no intent to harm others, just help myself. The way some players are making their point is akin to saying, "Because you are breathing air you are denying air from someone else." Not true.

Players need to separate action from intent. It is what separates "playing the game" and "griefing".

What the OP ran into could be one of those borderline cases. If the other player was denying the resource for their own gain, fair play. If they were using the item to try and force a newer player into an unfair fight...

Luckily these decisions are up to CCP and not the player base.


Sigh. The metric of financial gain is not the sole measure that exists.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#85 - 2014-11-27 01:39:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Veers Belvar
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
So, serious question. Is it a conscious choice you make to verbally drag your arse across every interesting discussion on the forums? Or are you just compelled beyond your means of control to try and make every thread worth posting in about you?

You keep using the word griefer in the context of what is considered grief play in other games. EVE has a different set of standards for grief play. Even the wikipedia entry of 'griefer' has an addendum (almost all the way to the bottom) mentioning this.

I do not understand how being wrong can be cathartic, but to each their own. Keep on putting that extra chromosome to it's fullest use.


Grrrr Veers, as usual. If you notice I post useful advice to OP (petition CCP - they are happy to reset the mission). The Grrr Veers anti PvE crowd feels compelled to chime in with flame wars and personal attacks. Want it to stop? Stop doing it! Make your points, shut up, and move one. If you feel compelled to disagree with someone you can do it respectfully, or just ignore him and stick to your own points. Name calling and personal attacks just make you look, well, stupid. But good luck trying getting Remmy to do stop!
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#86 - 2014-11-27 01:41:30 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
In before the thread move to Missions and Complexes :D

Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
If you successfully complete a level 4 mission for the Sisters of EVE, you might get 1m ISK and 8000 LP (worth about 12m-16m ISK today).


but .. SOE LP is protected by divine intervention and their ISK/LP ratio is immutable and indestructible :D

btw - you can get almost 15,000 SOE LP at Lanngisi for some Burner missions which is enough for a 40 mill probe in just one mission.

Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:

Perhaps it's time for missions specifically designed to be messed with by other players. Like missions that are given to two players at once and in some manner as "who gets to something/there/from somewhere first" ?


ummhh ... like in incursions ???



Back when incursions were just live events, in the days of Olde when live events were unplanned, spontaneous, and epic, there were some players who sided with Sansha.


When incursions became the canned, monetized, geriatric, predictable ISK Fountain for bitter nullsecers content that we know of it today, the Sansha sympathizers got screwed over.

It would have been great if they could at least get missions from Sansha incursion NPCs or if a system would have pro-Sansha sites that they could participate in. Such that if the pro Sansha players were grining sites better than the anti-Sansha forces, the Mothership NEVER appeared.
And only the one side that was victorious ultimately would be getting LP rewards. Failed to beat Sansha and kill the mother? NO LP for you! But the pro-Sansha players would get Sansha LP or maybe some special anti-concord LP that could be swapped for other pirate LPs? Of course if the mom got popped then the pro-empire players would get their reward and the Sansha players not.

And yes, perhaps some sites where they went head to head.

So yes, definitely incursions. I have been saying for years that so much content potential was overlooked with Incursions that it's practically a tragedy.



Ya...no thanks. Incursions are meant to be PvE, not PvP.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#87 - 2014-11-27 01:46:37 UTC
Nexus Day wrote:
Although I don't feel too bad for the OP, I think the people that say "PvP is everywhere" miss an important point.

Intent.

When I sell salvage on the market the intent is my gain. There is no intent to harm others, just help myself. The way some players are making their point is akin to saying, "Because you are breathing air you are denying air from someone else." Not true.

Players need to separate action from intent. It is what separates "playing the game" and "griefing".

What the OP ran into could be one of those borderline cases. If the other player was denying the resource for their own gain, fair play. If they were using the item to try and force a newer player into an unfair fight...

Luckily these decisions are up to CCP and not the player base.



Taking a small amount from each of a lot of rivals is no less PVP than taking a lot from a single player.

One of the best examples was the Gallente Ice Interdiction. Goonswarm's leadership's primary motive in this incident was strategic control of resources and monetary gain (although they motivated their line members with the 'for the lulz' line).

Every person that successfully mined Gallente ice during that period undermined the ISK that the GII made.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2014-11-27 01:50:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Veers Belvar wrote:


Ya...no thanks. Incursions are meant to be PvE, not PvP.



I think you'll find, if you weren't an ignorant clout, that nothing in the game is meant to be immune to PVP, and by virtue of that, everything is PVP. By virtue of flooding the market with CONCORD LP, you are PVP'ing. Use your brain, seriously, and think about things before you say something so ridiculous.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#89 - 2014-11-27 02:02:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
Veers Belvar wrote:


Grrrr Veers, as usual. If you notice I post useful advice to OP (petition CCP - they are happy to reset the mission). The Grrr Veers anti PvE crowd feels compelled to chime in with flame wars and personal attacks. Want it to stop? Stop doing it! Make your points, shut up, and move one. If you feel compelled to disagree with someone you can do it respectfully, or just ignore him and stick to your own points. Name calling and personal attacks just make you look, well, stupid. But good luck trying getting Remmy to do stop!

Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I can see this thread going in the usual direction.

But how about we fancy something else. Perhaps it's time for missions specifically designed to be messed with by other players. Like missions that are given to two players at once and in some manner as "who gets to something/there/from somewhere first" ?

Maybe even factionalize the matter. In highsec Caldari space for example you get missions that for the most part would entail fighting the Guristas. Well how about players who prefer to be on the side of Guristas getting the "same" mission from a Guristas agent in such manner that you have two NPC agents pitting players head to head?

Yeah I know what the complaints would be "Hurr durr bitter vets will bring in 50 remote reps hurr durr" but we have already seen missions exert arbitrary controls on the gates so the mechanics to ensure against the game giving one player a gangfest over another would not be a far departure from the present system.

Rather than shy away from the prospect of this thread, maybe it's time to incorporate the PVP element in it and allow pirate sympathizers have their fun too.


Just an idea that I'm sure will be shot down or ignored because spergers gonna sperg (and hate change).

iv always liked the idea of a mission that requires something like a damsel...but doesn't provide one and instead grants you the skill book for an expanded probe launcher.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2014-11-27 02:08:38 UTC
I will stop if you send me free Exile boosters.

The Improved variety, not this synth crap.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#91 - 2014-11-27 02:11:56 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I will stop if you send me free Exile boosters.

The Improved variety, not this synth crap.


Ha! Now worries, I don't really mind. Feel free to continue right on flaming. I was merely explaining things to Omar, who seemed rather distraught. If I managed to survive a 35 page troll Code/Goon bounty thread, I'm pretty sure I can handle personal attacks for a simple Remmy.

And OP - don't worry about these guys. Just petition CCP to reset the mission. They were happy to reset L4 Worlds Collide for me...it's not restricted to Rookie systems at all.
Redus Taw
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2014-11-27 02:13:32 UTC
I was flying a Thorax. I greatly appreciate all of the comments. Obviously the constructive criticism was greatly appreciated. Unfortunately a lot of you guys misunderstood what my point was. Anyone who said stuff like sandbox or salvage totally misread what I was saying and as for most people who mentioned PvP, there was also some confusion. Herzog Wolfhammer's comment on the first page was one of the better comments because he talked about the point I was trying to make. I understand PvP is a part of everything you do in EVE. To clarify, this is how I picture a solution to what I had an issue with. I dock --> view mission --> accept mission. Right after I do that, I'm the only one that can touch objectives in my mission, but as for salvage, duels, suicide ganks, etc. I honestly don't care about because I'm well aware I'm playing EVE. For everyone that said to go to CCP and ask for a reset, I did. They couldn't do anything for me. Some others commented back saying its not too big of a deal and I can earn back security standings quick which I realize now is true. Thanks again for all the comments.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#93 - 2014-11-27 02:19:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
Redus Taw wrote:
I was flying a Thorax. I greatly appreciate all of the comments. Obviously the constructive criticism was greatly appreciated. Unfortunately a lot of you guys misunderstood what my point was. Anyone who said stuff like sandbox or salvage totally misread what I was saying and as for most people who mentioned PvP, there was also some confusion. Herzog Wolfhammer's comment on the first page was one of the better comments because he talked about the point I was trying to make. I understand PvP is a part of everything you do in EVE. To clarify, this is how I picture a solution to what I had an issue with. I dock --> view mission --> accept mission. Right after I do that, I'm the only one that can touch objectives in my mission, but as for salvage, duels, suicide ganks, etc. I honestly don't care about because I'm well aware I'm playing EVE. For everyone that said to go to CCP and ask for a reset, I did. They couldn't do anything for me. Some others commented back saying its not too big of a deal and I can earn back security standings quick which I realize now is true. Thanks again for all the comments.

yeah no.

its not your objective till you turn it in.

if someone els wants it and you are unable or unwilling to defend it, its theirs.

This world is the will to power — and nothing besides

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#94 - 2014-11-27 02:29:15 UTC
Redus Taw wrote:
I was flying a Thorax. I greatly appreciate all of the comments. Obviously the constructive criticism was greatly appreciated. Unfortunately a lot of you guys misunderstood what my point was. Anyone who said stuff like sandbox or salvage totally misread what I was saying and as for most people who mentioned PvP, there was also some confusion. Herzog Wolfhammer's comment on the first page was one of the better comments because he talked about the point I was trying to make. I understand PvP is a part of everything you do in EVE. To clarify, this is how I picture a solution to what I had an issue with. I dock --> view mission --> accept mission. Right after I do that, I'm the only one that can touch objectives in my mission, but as for salvage, duels, suicide ganks, etc. I honestly don't care about because I'm well aware I'm playing EVE. For everyone that said to go to CCP and ask for a reset, I did. They couldn't do anything for me. Some others commented back saying its not too big of a deal and I can earn back security standings quick which I realize now is true. Thanks again for all the comments.


Try appealing the petition rejection from CCP and ask them to reset the mission post-downtime.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#95 - 2014-11-27 02:30:26 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
who wants to blow their alts

Shocked


I should feel dirty.


But I don't.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2014-11-27 02:30:30 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I will stop if you send me free Exile boosters.

The Improved variety, not this synth crap.


Ha! Now worries, I don't really mind. Feel free to continue right on flaming. I was merely explaining things to Omar, who seemed rather distraught. If I managed to survive a 35 page troll Code/Goon bounty thread, I'm pretty sure I can handle personal attacks for a simple Remmy.

And OP - don't worry about these guys. Just petition CCP to reset the mission. They were happy to reset L4 Worlds Collide for me...it's not restricted to Rookie systems at all.


There is literally nothing that you could explain to anyone on these forums let alone Omar, who just by virtue of being a DWA member knows far more about this game and understands it better than you ever could. Your delusions of self-importance aside, made quite evident by the fact that you think I was addressing you, I wasn't. I was talking to Ralph.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2014-11-27 02:33:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Redus Taw wrote:
I dock --> view mission --> accept mission. Right after I do that, I'm the only one that can touch objectives in my mission,


And this is where you're wrong. What you want is instancing. EVE doesn't do instancing and it never will. If it ever does, it won't be EVE anymore, that's not what it was ever intended to be. You share the same playground as everyone else and like it or not, if someone else wants to swing on your monkeybars, they're gunna, unless you can stop em.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Sugar Smacks
Khanid Royal Navy
Khanid.
#98 - 2014-11-27 02:49:01 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
Sugar Smacks wrote:
Karl Hobb wrote:
2. What ship was OP flying?
2. obviously a cruiser tops.
Explain.



A cruiser is the highest ship that will fit in a level 2 gate.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#99 - 2014-11-27 02:54:13 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I will stop if you send me free Exile boosters.

The Improved variety, not this synth crap.


Ha! Now worries, I don't really mind. Feel free to continue right on flaming. I was merely explaining things to Omar, who seemed rather distraught. If I managed to survive a 35 page troll Code/Goon bounty thread, I'm pretty sure I can handle personal attacks for a simple Remmy.

And OP - don't worry about these guys. Just petition CCP to reset the mission. They were happy to reset L4 Worlds Collide for me...it's not restricted to Rookie systems at all.


There is literally nothing that you could explain to anyone on these forums let alone Omar, who just by virtue of being a DWA member knows far more about this game and understands it better than you ever could. Your delusions of self-importance aside, made quite evident by the fact that you think I was addressing you, I wasn't. I was talking to Ralph.


Grrr Veers...keep trying Remmy, someday you will make me care about you! Not today though, sorry.
Tear Jar
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#100 - 2014-11-27 03:07:16 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I can see this thread going in the usual direction.

But how about we fancy something else. Perhaps it's time for missions specifically designed to be messed with by other players. Like missions that are given to two players at once and in some manner as "who gets to something/there/from somewhere first" ?

Maybe even factionalize the matter. In highsec Caldari space for example you get missions that for the most part would entail fighting the Guristas. Well how about players who prefer to be on the side of Guristas getting the "same" mission from a Guristas agent in such manner that you have two NPC agents pitting players head to head?

Yeah I know what the complaints would be "Hurr durr bitter vets will bring in 50 remote reps hurr durr" but we have already seen missions exert arbitrary controls on the gates so the mechanics to ensure against the game giving one player a gangfest over another would not be a far departure from the present system.

Rather than shy away from the prospect of this thread, maybe it's time to incorporate the PVP element in it and allow pirate sympathizers have their fun too.


Just an idea that I'm sure will be shot down or ignored because spergers gonna sperg (and hate change).


We have missions designed to mess with others. FW missions broadcast when someone starts them to everyone in system and gives a warpin.

The main issue with a competitive mission like the one you mentioned is that, if they are worth fighting over, they are even more profitable if you cooperate. You would quickly see people agreeing to "throw" the fight so they can blitz these missions and split the profits.