These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Lv4s 100-150mil/h+: Breakdown

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#241 - 2015-11-29 17:17:12 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too.

So... Can we surmise that Faction Warfare and Incursions may need a review with respect to the actual LP loot tables so that there are less conflicts with standard missions and the LP rewards from Empire corporations? (I'm not talking about a nerf, just a rebalance with respect to the LP rewards)


Told you the PVE imbalances are complicatedBlink
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#242 - 2015-11-29 18:39:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
baltec1 wrote:
Add in highsec and we might have a deal.

What's the benefit in high-sec?

baltec1 wrote:
Told you the PVE imbalances are complicatedBlink

So it would seem... Is there an easier fix, like just making certain LP items exclusive to Faction Warfare as opposed to duplicating many in the Navy Factions?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#243 - 2015-11-29 19:41:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
I would trade removing lvl 4's and incursions from High-Sec if we got local removed in Null.

Include removing local from low-sec and my interest is perked.


Add in highsec and we might have a deal.


Personally I hate local in all forms, but honesty I think this is just your bias against High-Sec coming out again.

Removing local from Null sec makes sense since it is supposed to be no-mans land without any benefits the empires have.

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too.

So... Can we surmise that Faction Warfare and Incursions may need a review with respect to the actual LP loot tables so that there are less conflicts with standard missions and the LP rewards from Empire corporations? (I'm not talking about a nerf, just a rebalance with respect to the LP rewards)


LP as a whole needs to be reworked. And there needs to be unique items for corporations to make it worth it to actually run for some of the corporations.

Currently there is no benefit to running most of the Caldari corps except for location, spice it up and give invulns to Home Guard and BCS to Navy, other things to Internal Security... etc.

FW needs its own separate and unique LP that should be more like Battle Rewards and go towards special items.

Incursions shouldn't get LP at all. It is stupid that they pay out LP in the first place.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#244 - 2015-11-29 20:38:35 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Good post Chainsaw, a lot of good info here. I have some questions.

From this post are you saying that incursions runners universal LP is the reason the other major empires LP are in such a poor state?

You mention BPCs often, how are these converted into isk ? Like do you produce the item the BPC is for or do you just sell the BPC on contract?

I found that Apanake missions has the better loot compared to Lanngisi but you referred to Lanngisi as THE place to run burners at, why?

1. not specifically, More of the interaction between available agents and LP stores, however incursions certainly limit that. A good LP store doesn't count for much when they only have courier agents available. But compare 14k lp in a 0.5 vs 12k in a 0.6 and the same isk/lp payout, I'm picking the agent in the 0.5 almost every time.

2. typically build the items and sell them on the market. Far easier to update market orders than contracts. Although things like ship BPCs are decent to sell as it is much easier to move a bpc than a ship. Never tried selling module BPCs, but I have seen them on contracts a few times. Years ago BPCs required special skills to make, which was nice as I had a character that could to t2 production so I had most of those skills. now they typically just require basic minerals and no skills.

3. no idea about loot. but I'd guess blood raiders have better salvage than angels. Don't really loot or salvage much myself.

4. constellation layout, and the only neighboring constellation has a trade hub on the exit, so most burner missions are forced inside constellation and that results in a lot of 2 jump burners. In other places with multiple neighboring constellations I usually get ~5 jumps on average. That is a huge travel time difference and a bunch of gate jumps so time spent loading the next system.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#245 - 2015-11-29 20:47:50 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

What's the benefit in high-sec?


Easier to hide in a war.


Arthur Aihaken wrote:

So it would seem... Is there an easier fix, like just making certain LP items exclusive to Faction Warfare as opposed to duplicating many in the Navy Factions?


Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#246 - 2015-11-29 22:29:34 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Easier to hide in a war.

You mean as opposed to say, not undocking?

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE.

Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#247 - 2015-11-30 00:11:23 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
I can see if the LP stores in all the empires were as lucrative as SOE and Thurker Tribe but that's totally not the case. SOE and Thurker Tribe are the ONLY Factions you can run for that pays anything decent in hi-sec. The LP store for the other major empires are worthless and are in dire need of a complete rebalance. If the other major empire faction had attractive LP stores with good LP to isk returns then I'd be running Lev 5s in low sec with 2 Rattlesnakes.


The empires do have lucrative LP stores, they just don't always have good agents to gain LP with. The major factions typically have 3 different styles of LP stores. there are very often high isk/lp items from one or two of these stores. Then there is the "navy" corp which has a similar LP store to FW.

I'll break it down with gallente as I have pretty much no interest in running with them:

There are 17 corps with Fed navy webs/tracking comps/sensor boosters BPCs in the LP store. So a good number of items to trade in, although it can require a lot of investment in tags. Not so sure about agents.

then there are another 10 corps with the LP store that sells Federation navy mag stab bpcs. tbh I'm not really sure what else is in there, or what that is trading for right now but you could look it up. I would guess it is a decent trade.

then there are 5 navy style corps, one of which is the FW store which has a lot of extra goodies and reduced prices on some items. oh and the LP generation method is a bit different so that can as I've said already easily devalue other items. these generally aren't worth running for.

I could repeat myself with caldari/amarr/minmatar. and probably add on an analysis of "good" agents (and then "great" agents I can count on one hand)

my main complaint is incursion runners can convert concord LP into any empire LP so any time any trades get good they can go fill demand. This ends up being a cap on isk/lp rates and imo the result is a lot of corps just aren't worth running for as they don't have any good agents to gain LP with. If there isn't a good agent LP values should increase to compensate. Making 3k isk/lp but running with a less desirable agent should more or less balance out with running for a good agent and getting more LP but trading at a lower rate. However with CONCORD convertible LP that can't happen. And you end up just being better off running for SoE in lanngisi or apanake instead of most empire corps. And if you want to max out with burners it is lanngisi or bust. I had a nice thing going in a 0.6 system at one point, but it just doesn't seem worth it at this point.

The main problems with not running SoE are:
1. how many corps have desirable agents? For standard missions the main aim is for a 0.5 in a constellation without a lowsec, and short warps are preferred. If you start to look at burners it is hard to even think past Lanngisi. Sure they might have a nice looking LP store but running in a 0.7 lowers your LP to the point you would have been better off going to an SoE hub.

2. It can be easy to flood markets with some stores. According to fuzzworks the 5 run Fed navy tracking comps are 1967 isk/lp to BUY orders. but how much could you really cash out on? I'm sure you can maintain the high rate over time but when each one costs ~11k lp it would be very easy to over produce. However that store also has a few other nice looking trades and then fed navy web blueprints so that should provide a lot of volume, but other stores might not be so lucky. Another advantage of SoE, many items and lots of LP sinks so it is hard to overproduce. I found an item with a good rate in another store and just by myself I can nearly meet demand, however a few other people found it, so price competition gets in the way. with SoE stuff I put up an order, walk away and come back to isk in the wallet. Oh yea and I get more LP per mission with SoE.


Good post Chainsaw, a lot of good info here. I have some questions.

From this post are you saying that incursions runners universal LP is the reason the other major empires LP are in such a poor state?

You mention BPCs often, how are these converted into isk ? Like do you produce the item the BPC is for or do you just sell the BPC on contract?

I found that Apanake missions has the better loot compared to Lanngisi but you referred to Lanngisi as THE place to run burners at, why?



1) FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too.

2) You really need to build the items from the BPC to make better isk per LP. Some people prefer to find contracts to sell into or set up their own, but that is time consuming for some items and harder than a market trade.

3) Lann is better than Apanake because of the constellation layout. Burners will be closer, and you will almost never get a low sec. It is the only system for SoE that gives you that really.


Hmm, I didn't realize this about Lanngisi. I do all my missions now in Apanake because the blood raiders loot drops meta 4 DCs (8.5 mill isk each) and meta 4 medium/small nuets (5.5-3 mill each). Also because I was flying NMs and later the Paladins. I can fly Vargurs and Machs now so maybe it's time to move back to Lanngisi.

The burners here in Apanake are usually 5-8 drops away from mission hub and there is one that's friggin 25 drops away in low sec (I always cancel this one).
The Bigpuns
United Standings Improvement Agency
#248 - 2015-11-30 08:28:46 UTC
\o/ this has become an actual rational and informed discussion about balancing! Shame it's still off topic, but let's keep it here rather than Arthur's new thread!

I don't like the idea of removing local from hisec, it would make it into a less sociable game imo. Let's get rid of all the scams in local instead! That will cause some flames and tears that we can all enjoy!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#249 - 2015-11-30 11:44:51 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Easier to hide in a war.

You mean as opposed to say, not undocking?

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE.

Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both?


Both and also missions. It might even be a good idea to remove loot from npc wrecks and put them into the mission LP stores for highsec which would not only greatly expand the selection options for spending LP but also increase the market for T1 mods which would help new industry players. Faction equipment could be something only available in lowsec and dead space/complex mods in new null sov mission agents. Remove mission blitzing and we would have a much better risk/reward situation. Bonus being that null players would have to take gates just like in highsec so the danger is higher than today.

Faction ammo and the cheap low quality implants could stay with highsec (as in only highsec can get these items) agents with the mid tiers going to lowsec and +6 implants going to null. This way each area of space would have its own unique selling points without stepping on the toes of other areas but at the same time the rewards get larger with the more danger you take on.

Anomalies in null sov should stop being the primary form of income, they inject too much raw isk and they can be run AFK. Rather than have the military index go towards spawning more anoms it should go towards getting better level mission agents so having level 3 index gets you levels 1,2 and 3 agents and so forth. This way you have content for everyone from the day one newbee to the bittervet in a carrier.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#250 - 2015-11-30 12:31:07 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Easier to hide in a war.

You mean as opposed to say, not undocking?

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE.

Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both?


Both and also missions. It might even be a good idea to remove loot from npc wrecks and put them into the mission LP stores for highsec which would not only greatly expand the selection options for spending LP but also increase the market for T1 mods which would help new industry players. Faction equipment could be something only available in lowsec and dead space/complex mods in new null sov mission agents. Remove mission blitzing and we would have a much better risk/reward situation. Bonus being that null players would have to take gates just like in highsec so the danger is higher than today.

Like I've said previously, I do not like the concord LP situation but since a change is already in the works and is currently being implemented, I purposefully ignore any incursion discussion, either for or against until whatever CCP has planned for it is fully implemented and the effects are observed.

This however means that any suggested changes to mission LP payout or ability/speed in getting that LP is also not relevant. Currently any high value low volume LP items (everything that isn't SOE or Navy) is controlled by concord LP/Incursion runners because of the 1 to .8. conversion rate. Ideally this should be controlled by mission runners. Encourage mission runners to move around from corp to corp, system to system, make choices for who you run matter and make the standings system matter (more than it does now) and allow enterprising individuals that go the extra mile to reap extra rewards. Also allow pirates to gank additional targets as a full burner/blitz operation runs into 4 to 6 billion in ships and mods and need to be moved.

SOE LP items have steadily been on the rise since the Blood event. Currently there are huge buy orders up for SOE items for over 1900isk/lp. Modules are on the market for close to 3kisk/lp. We should see the Concord LP being cashed out into SOE items soonish as soon as the converted isk/lp surpasses that of implants that incursion runners have access to. However, that does beg the question that I haven't received a good answer to. If SOE item value is on the rise, doesn't that mean demand is outstripping the mission runner's ability to supply SOE items? If so, how does reducing LP income via direct or indirect nerfs make sense? Unless you like 50mill or 100mill faction probe launchers? 500mill Stratioses? Mission running is largely a market controlled income stream so why apply external nerfs to something that's already controlled efficiently by the players?

That said, if whatever they do to incursions removes or reduces the 'threat' of concord LP to LP stores consideration will need to be given on weather or not missions will need to be adjusted in accordance with that but we will only know that after incursion changes. People here are fond of bashing CCP for making too many and too big changes too quickly but those same people are prone to falling into that same trap, as demonstrated by the nerf mission crowd.

Identify what systems synergies and compete
Realize the effect one system will have on another
Observe effects of changes to one system has on another
Ask, is there (still) a problem
THEN discuss a solution to the problem.

You guys are skipping a few steps. Pirate

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#251 - 2015-11-30 12:34:23 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Easier to hide in a war.

You mean as opposed to say, not undocking?

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE.

Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both?


Both and also missions. It might even be a good idea to remove loot from npc wrecks and put them into the mission LP stores for highsec which would not only greatly expand the selection options for spending LP but also increase the market for T1 mods which would help new industry players. Faction equipment could be something only available in lowsec and dead space/complex mods in new null sov mission agents. Remove mission blitzing and we would have a much better risk/reward situation. Bonus being that null players would have to take gates just like in highsec so the danger is higher than today.

Like I've said previously, I do not like the concord LP situation but since a change is already in the works and is currently being implemented, I purposefully ignore any incursion discussion, either for or against until whatever CCP has planned for it is fully implemented and the effects are observed.

This however means that any suggested changes to mission LP payout or ability/speed in getting that LP is also not relevant. Currently any high value low volume LP items (everything that isn't SOE or Navy) is controlled by concord LP/Incursion runners because of the 1 to .8. conversion rate. Ideally this should be controlled by mission runners. Encourage mission runners to move around from corp to corp, system to system, make choices for who you run matter and make the standings system matter (more than it does now) and allow enterprising individuals that go the extra mile to reap extra rewards. Also allow pirates to gank additional targets as a full burner/blitz operation runs into 4 to 6 billion in ships and mods and need to be moved.

SOE LP items have steadily been on the rise since the Blood event. Currently there are huge buy orders up for SOE items for over 1900isk/lp. Modules are on the market for close to 3kisk/lp. We should see the Concord LP being cashed out into SOE items soonish as soon as the converted isk/lp surpasses that of implants that incursion runners have access to. However, that does beg the question that I haven't received a good answer to. If SOE item value is on the rise, doesn't that mean demand is outstripping the mission runner's ability to supply SOE items? If so, how does reducing LP income via direct or indirect nerfs make sense? Unless you like 50mill or 100mill faction probe launchers? 500mill Stratioses? Mission running is largely a market controlled income stream so why apply external nerfs to something that's already controlled efficiently by the players?

That said, if whatever they do to incursions removes or reduces the 'threat' of concord LP to LP stores consideration will need to be given on weather or not missions will need to be adjusted in accordance with that but we will only know that after incursion changes. People here are fond of bashing CCP for making too many and too big changes too quickly but those same people are prone to falling into that same trap, as demonstrated by the nerf mission crowd.

Identify what systems synergies and compete
Realize the effect one system will have on another
Observe effects of changes to one system has on another
Ask, is there (still) a problem
THEN discuss a solution to the problem.

You guys are skipping a few steps. Pirate


Fleshed out the idea a bit more, go re-read it.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#252 - 2015-11-30 12:51:34 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Fleshed out the idea a bit more, go re-read it.

Doesn't change anything at all, all my points are still valid and unanswered. You are still skipping steps 1-4 and going straight to step 5. Also doesn't address what is currently happening to SOE LP value and upcoming/planned changes to incursions (Drifters, OGB).

The market is apparently showing that mission LP supply can not keep up with SOE item usage demand and you are suggesting we move those items away from the majority of people supplying them further reducing supply?

How does that make sense?

Quote:

Like I've said previously, I do not like the concord LP situation but since a change is already in the works and is currently being implemented, I purposefully ignore any incursion discussion, either for or against until whatever CCP has planned for it is fully implemented and the effects are observed.

This however means that any suggested changes to mission LP payout or ability/speed in getting that LP is also not relevant. Currently any high value low volume LP items (everything that isn't SOE or Navy) is controlled by concord LP/Incursion runners because of the 1 to .8. conversion rate. Ideally this should be controlled by mission runners. Encourage mission runners to move around from corp to corp, system to system, make choices for who you run matter and make the standings system matter (more than it does now) and allow enterprising individuals that go the extra mile to reap extra rewards. Also allow pirates to gank additional targets as a full burner/blitz operation runs into 4 to 6 billion in ships and mods and need to be moved.

SOE LP items have steadily been on the rise since the Blood event. Currently there are huge buy orders up for SOE items for over 1900isk/lp. Modules are on the market for close to 3kisk/lp. We should see the Concord LP being cashed out into SOE items soonish as soon as the converted isk/lp surpasses that of implants that incursion runners have access to. However, that does beg the question that I haven't received a good answer to. If SOE item value is on the rise, doesn't that mean demand is outstripping the mission runner's ability to supply SOE items? If so, how does reducing LP income via direct or indirect nerfs make sense? Unless you like 50mill or 100mill faction probe launchers? 500mill Stratioses? Mission running is largely a market controlled income stream so why apply external nerfs to something that's already controlled efficiently by the players?

That said, if whatever they do to incursions removes or reduces the 'threat' of concord LP to LP stores consideration will need to be given on weather or not missions will need to be adjusted in accordance with that but we will only know that after incursion changes. People here are fond of bashing CCP for making too many and too big changes too quickly but those same people are prone to falling into that same trap, as demonstrated by the nerf mission crowd.

Identify what systems synergies and compete
Realize the effect one system will have on another
Observe effects of changes to one system has on another
Ask, is there (still) a problem
THEN discuss a solution to the problem.

You guys are skipping a few steps. Pirate

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#253 - 2015-11-30 13:09:07 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:

Doesn't change anything at all, all my points are still valid and unanswered. You are still skipping steps 1-4 and going straight to step 5. Also doesn't address what is currently happening to SOE LP value and upcoming/planned changes to incursions (Drifters, OGB).

The market is apparently showing that mission LP supply can not keep up with SOE item usage demand and you are suggesting we move those items away from the majority of people supplying them further reducing supply?

How does that make sense?


Its not being moved away from most players, we all have access to low sec space.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#254 - 2015-11-30 13:10:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

Doesn't change anything at all, all my points are still valid and unanswered. You are still skipping steps 1-4 and going straight to step 5. Also doesn't address what is currently happening to SOE LP value and upcoming/planned changes to incursions (Drifters, OGB).

The market is apparently showing that mission LP supply can not keep up with SOE item usage demand and you are suggesting we move those items away from the majority of people supplying them further reducing supply?

How does that make sense?


Its not being moved away from most players, we all have access to low sec space.



I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#255 - 2015-11-30 13:28:53 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:



I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work.


Hey if you don't want to leave the safety of highsec that's up to you but if you want those better rewards your ganna need to take that risk and put in that extra effort.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#256 - 2015-11-30 13:33:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
baltec1 wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:



I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work.


Hey if you don't want to leave the safety of highsec that's up to you but if you want those better rewards your ganna need to take that risk and put in that extra effort.

You know better than anyone that's not how it works, witch means you're close to trolling. Still dodging everything else, not surprised in the least.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#257 - 2015-11-30 13:37:39 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#258 - 2015-11-30 13:45:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward.


But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'?

The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually...
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#259 - 2015-11-30 13:50:03 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward.


But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'?

The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually...



You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this.

Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions.

Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's

At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal.

You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#260 - 2015-11-30 13:56:02 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work.

That sounds surprisingly bitter. I never figured you for an idealist.

Look you can beat Hi sec players with a sick as much as you want, ain't going to change a dang thing except kill the game and you know this, everyone knows this. That's all these replies are, beating Hi sec players with a stick. The hate and anger is very real Ugh

Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3