Bring Back 5.5 Security Status :parrotdad:

Bring Back 5.5 Security Status :parrotdad:

Missions haven’t changed since the Eighties :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: . Bringing back a higher security status or creating some new mission content might inspire people to play more.

Increasing mission pay wouldn’t hurt either. :heavy_dollar_sign::heavy_dollar_sign::heavy_dollar_sign:

Not that ■■■■ again…

1 Like

What’s wrong with questions about security status?

I didn’t criticize your “Training Boost Bundle” post.


Special missions for people with higher security status than 5 would be quite interesting. They could be hard enough to require Marauders, which paints a big “shoot me” target on those people’s backs.

1 Like

It used to be a thing. Some people still have the 5.5 :shield:,from%20giving%20out%20their%20missions.

What’s the point of having a higher security status than 5.0?

Also: missions won’t get any love until they get a complete overhaul, due to code issues. Just boosting payouts without also tuning their content would be pointless, as we really don’t need to increase the isk faucet without also upping destruction risks.

1 Like

Do you know how poorly missions pay nowadays?

1 Like

I do. I run a lot of missions. Many if them take only a few minutes to complete, require minimal effort beyond an occasional click in the UI, and have virtually zero risk for a knowledgeable player. Adding income to them is increasing the isk faucet.

Most mission income for Security missions rightfully comes from bounties - because the risk is the ships you are fighting, and the bounties are the reward for surviving. The mission itself having a reward is just a bonus.

Meek. I say bring back 10.0 Security Status!


How about making -10 sec status actually feasible?
Currently, it has 0 pros and only cons. Other than “look at me I am a pirate, wahhh”, it is totally pointless.

1 Like

So, for the record. You’re saying that running missions pays well?

Nice strawman.

I said they pay appropriately for their risk level. Minimal risk should have minimal reward. Missions themselves aren’t risky.

Increasing income from PvE activities is by definition increasing the isk faucet. That’s entirely separate from risk vs reward, but the game needs more isk sinks, not larger isk faucets.

I’d link some kill mails from mission ganks…but I’m sure someone would cry foul and the hallway monitors would block or lock the thread. :no_entry_sign::lock:

1 Like

You are deliberately ignoring where I already addressed the enemy ship risk and its direct payouts (bounties for pirates/drones, tag drops for empires) in Security missions.

Security missions are also not the only type of mission.

If you want to discuss this, actually incorporate my entire argument, don’t cherrypick and falsely rephrase my stance.

No, I’m not. I think it’s funny that you don’t consider risking a 2b ISK ship for 5-10m isk/hr return ENOUGH of a risk.

1 Like

If the only income from missioning were the agent payouts, nobody would run them with a 2b ship.

The fact is, there are more rewards involved in Security missions that the agent payout. Looking at solely the agent payout without accounting for the other income components of Security missions is dishonest.

Edit to add: PvP risk is not part of the calculation of mission risk vs reward. That’s not something CCP can or should account for in their design, because PvE activity payouts aren’t coupled to PvP combat.

I didn’t exclude other income components.

The total payout from a Security Mission is dismal.

Prove me wrong.

How about you prove yourself right, first? You are the one arguing they need to pay more. Where is your evidence that your statement is valid?

1 Like

That is not true. CCP has introduced several new missions in recent years and very recently even to figure out how the system works (lol). Mission can be created by CCP, they don’t require more work than this Trig Trash and they much more enjoyable and manageable than anoms and this Trig Trash.

It’s not dishonest. It is a fact if you insist on bringing up faucets as a problem. No other income source from security missions is a faucet. Looting not create ISK, it reshuffles ISK if you sell the things and draws ISK out of the economy if you do so or reprocess for minerals. LP also draw ISK out of the economy and don’t add any ISK. Any “ISK income” from LP is just a reshuffle of existing ISK. Maybe you ought to learn a few things first before you argue.


dono about pay increase, but adding a chance of BOSS spawning in missions would be cool. Current looting in missions is extremely boring, basically it is all scrap metal with very rare exceptions.

1 Like