bullet points for the dev team to look at (easier for them) Missions
Increase the isk rate to:
Level 1: Should provide a minimum of 1.5 million isk a mission
Level 2: Should Provide a minimum of 3 million isk a mission
Level 3: Should provide a minimum of 10 million isk a mission
Level 4: Should provide a minimum of 30 million isk a mission
Level 5: Should provide a minimum of 50 million isk a mission
Mechanical changes to missions
Players can no longer probe a mission, and instead must now acquire the mission from the agent to gain access to the location (for pvp related purposes).
Distribution missions will now require up front isk, and should be changed to require the person to fill a more “trade” related role like buying low and selling high. This can be accomplished by “required isk to start mission” options, and “finish isk payments”. This should help combat botting.
Reduce the speed of l4/l5 Cruiser + mobs a little (they are to fast for close range ships)
Create a lp to isk conversion option to directly allow people to covert lp into isk this rate should probably be around 3,000 isk per lp and should only require LP to covert. this will make the lp system work as intended.
Create more distinct trade routes for haulers in eve. thats not directly related to the market buy low sell high concept. haulers have a significant problem with this part of eve starting out and it really just destroys one of the good career options of eve. due to doing 1-5m per 15+ jumps all day. maybe something to do with hauling people to planets as a “population transport” gig would be good (with ships for it please!).
Buff high sec mining by enabling ventures to have more beams on their ship (4-5) to stablize the isk value
buff exploration isk gains.
delete asteroid belts, long over due. or at the lead
Math should work out like
High sec average per hour rate (of all professions) 60-80m
Low sec per hour average 80-100m
Null Sec and wormhole 100-120m
Short version: Reroll a took, transfer no isk, and do missions, you will understand how bad it is.
both trading and missions are not providing a lot of income to them. If you measure the rates, it takes about 15-20 minutes to do a mission (maybe 10-15 minutes at lower levels). That means you can accomplish between 3-5 an hour.
If you measure this up to the current 100-500k per a mission rate, you are making less in an hour that you would gain from going out and clearing 1 belt in null. In fact, mining an hour would provide more isk then missions, and i have suspicion that low sec ratting would.
when you add this to the high isk requirements for LP rewards, to balance the income rates out, you struggle even more to get to a fair hourly rate.
What i imagine happend is the values were good. Later, higher requirements were added to the lp rewards to help control the economy (a patch-it-fix, ccp is notorious for them) but the increase requirements and the inflation has pushed them out of “Balance”.
Additionally, Missions (combat) seem to be closer to null mining, or combat sites, so they should fundamentally work the same. their isk rates are lower, and the mission rewards are not a means of balancing out the difference. Lastly, the mission rats are generally smarter then null rates (very often kiting, and very quick while doing it).
Finally, to help encourage more people to enter low security space and do missions that would potentially offer more, we make it more difficult to catch people doing them. having the pirates have to have the agent access is a good way of doing that; after all t hey still have the chance of being caught on the gate.
The low end mission income buff isn’t a bad idea. New players could do with better income at lvl 1 & 2 level, it doesn’t need to be as laughable as it is now. All ‘new player’ income sources could really use a buff. As long as it can’t then be blitzed to beat the high end income sources.
Imo, the lp system needs to be redesigned. its the only reason blizing really causes issues with missions. A buff to isk rates on missions would only equate to “optimization” which is done in any other aspect of eve. So running lvl 3 at say 20-30m per a run would at best give 60-70m an hour. which is not competitive with 100-150m in null, but its much better then the 3-5m/hr it does now.
No it would not.
People are efficient, and will always do the most efficient thing. They will still go to null.
More people may come to high sec, but no significant effect will take place by players on the economy.
As is often the case, this thread has conflated two issues: the whole new player experience and wealth progression, and the general highsec mechanics. They are not at all the same, and in fact, probably a significant majority of highsec activity is generated by experienced veterans min/maxing content and turbo farming the opportunities there under the watchful eye of CONCORD.
Any changes to the game have to keep that in mind. Despite what they will claim, players farming highsec L4s in their marauders and Faction battleships are generally not new players. So you have to balance the highsec income potential around these veterans to keep the economy in check and the risk/reward balanced.
Buffing low level missions some doesn’t seem an exploitable thing although I don’t recall it being especially problematic when I ran them 6 or so years ago. Sure your income is modest, but so are your needs. That content was designed for basic ships, and has been marginalized even more by general power creep, so you can run them in very cheap ships, which you should be doing as a new player. I can see why a veteran might find the unrewarding when redoing them, but to a new player who doesn’t know how much ISK is out there, it probably is still a perfectly fine experience.
But otherwise I would be very wary of increasing highsec income in ways that veterans can exploit by the usual ways their wealth, SP and multiple accounts allow. There are already very viable ways to make competitive incomes in highsec, so any income buffs wrapped in the New Player Flag should probably target them directly in the NPE or some gated epic arcs like the SoE one to prevent them from just adding more resources to the shared economy with no or very little content generation given the presence of CONCORD.
I should never ask one word questions. When I do I cannot complain about the answers I get.
Look, I am asking what the goal of the changes is, what makes you think that the changes will achieve the goal. Are we trying to make new players richer? to what purpose? so they can lose more ships or get to be omega without having to take some risks?
No I am not one of those ‘if he wants isk he should join a null corp’ people. But it is true and any changes you make will echo throughout new edens economic ecosystem. It is difficult to make any change that JUST helps new players (I blame @Malcanis)
this is not to say that the way things are currently are perfect. There should be some perfect ‘sweet spot’ of rewards and I find it highly unlikely that CCP guessed the perfect numbers right out of the gate.
I am more a fan of A/B testing and that they make incremental changes and see if it has even a small effect, not crank the dial to 11 and see what this baby will do.
I babble, back to topic
Income buffs at this stage of the game will need a corresponding income sink. Otherwise we are just pumping more isk into the system. So if you propose a buff to income can you help by also proposing a sink to remove the isk as well?