Come on @CCP, sort it out!!! I can totally understand needing to set a time limit on repeating the arc, but putting a time limit on repeating a mission in the arc that wasn’t completeable due to other player actions is just nasty. There must be another way of figuring this out.
Did you submit a request to a gm see if they can reset the mission. If you decline any part of an arc, that resets the timer.
Because several functions are tied to faction standings and they didnt want them to be an easy endeavor, they made very few ways to receive faction standings.
COSMOS and career agents are one time use. Where has you must wait 90 days from completion or declined to restart the arc.
Hey all - just wanna round up on my original post with how it all worked out.
So I made a petition regarding not being able to get the mission back etc and the awesome @GM_Vision reset it for me so I could speak to the agent again.
So, not too long after DT I went back to the agent, retook the mission - flew out the the target system that is normally camped by combat probers waiting for the epic arc folk to move on their objective, notice only two others in local and one was blue.
Then I realised I didn’t put the mission item in my hold, so I flew all the way back, got it and returned - by which time there was +1 neut. I started to warp to the mission objective to see if that would spawn the usual combat probes and sure enough it did.
So I bounced around the system and eventually they musta got bored or had to go afk cos combat probes got sucked in.
So I tentitavely warped back to the mission and went in and did the whole thing while hammering dscan and eventually my piss poor dps Crow finally took the end boss down and I got the mission item and GTFO.
TBF it was fun. But I did make me think about two things that could, I think, be better:
The mission always being in the same system means it’s overly camped for guaranteed players coming in and doing a very specific thing. I think spawning the missions in a nullsec epic arc should happen in a random number of systems in a given range from the station.
If a baddie ruins your final mission site and you don’t get the mission reward you should be able to reset the mission without having to wait 2 weeks, 3 months or whatever. Give us a standing decrease but let us make that back doing missions in dangerous space so we still provider the content for these baddies (and ourselves if we really love the game). I don’t mind dying in a fire, but I do mind being told I can’t use the content for a signficant amount of time if I’m ready in game and Omega. Make us the content
Anyway, I’ll leave you with that and @Prometheus_XRay thanks for all the support
The game doesn’t have a programmed response to “another player entered my Epic Arc and looted my drop”. It’s not really the sort of thing you can code for. I understand the frustration of this, but it’s a situation that would be handled as you already did - by checking with other players, checking contracts for the item, dealing directly with the thief, or contacting a GM for assistance.
As for the earlier comments of “I don’t understand the design decision” and “surely delay caused by another player isn’t a good thing”: CCP has the design philosophy that “a game is best when it causes players to experience strong emotions”.
From a design point of view, they don’t really seem to care about the difference between strong negative or strong positive emotions. Or rather, they seem to think that the strong negative emotions are a needed ingredient, else the strong positive ones won’t really occur.
So from CCP’s point of view, another player significantly inconveniencing you by stealing something you need and can’t replace… is a good thing. Different people have different reactions to this approach. However as a matter of managing your long-term mindset about understanding EVE, just be aware that “you got screwed over by another player and now you have to either suck it up or find some other solution” isn’t a design flaw. It’s part of the design.
I think if you re-read what I was saying I totally have accepted all the things you point out. I was more interested in balancing the playing field - which CCP does do quite often in their updatess, often to the chargrin of many of us here
But thank you so much for your very well written response, I agree with you entirely, but I feel you’re missing some of the other things that CCP do.