Low sec vs high sec security missions

Does anyone know if there’s a difference in reward between running security missions in low sec vs high sec? (Not talking about faction warfare missions)

I would have assumed better rewards running missions in low sec - but after doing a few, now I’m not so sure…

1 Like

You should get more LP for missions in low sec than in high sec. It depends on the missions, however. The rewards are automatically balanced based on how many people run particular missions. The more people run burner missions, the lower their rewards drop. Other missions, which are not being run as often, see their rewards increase slightly. Not sure how high the exact LP reward are but when I run L4 DED Blockade, The Police Invasion, Navy Armada or The Assault in NPC null sec, I receive over 12000 LP per mission. Back in the days when Burners were new, their original LP reward was around 18000 LP, I believe. This dropped down to the current levels of around 8-10000.

1 Like

there is 2 types of rewards:

  1. reward from agent - not worth it compare to HS
  2. reward for killing NPC - usually much-much higher than in HS.
1 Like

Thanks for the feedback- this seems to be in line with what I’m seeing.

This page is useful.


The mission LP rewards also scale with the system security of the agent. The formula for calculating the LP reward is:
LP reward = (1.6288 - System security) × Base LP
This means that an agent in an 0.5 security system pays 80% more than an agent in 1.00 security system

Compared to a 0.5 system, I guess the LP reward from a 0.1 system will be about 35% better. Bounties will be at least 50% higher.

1 Like

As far as I know from when I did missions in low sec:

The mission itself and NPC’s is the same - so the bounties are the same - no matter where the mission happens, HS, LS or null.

The only difference is the reward that the agent pays you for completing the mission. The isk reward, bonus, and loyalty points is determined by the location of the agent only.

Rewards and points are not based on the location of the mission.

So for example for a 0.7 high sec agent you will get the same rewards whether he sends you to high sec or low sec. No difference bethwee HS and LS.

But if you moved to an agent in a 0.3 system for example, you will get higher rewards for missions… because the agent himself is in a lower security system.

I hope this helps to answer it :slight_smile:

1 Like

I wish to add that rewards from missions (ISK and LP both) are not really tied to Hi- or Low-Sec status of giving system, but the absolute security rating.

Thus same mission pays a lot more if taken from agent residing in 0.5 system than it would from 1.0 system, even if both are hi-sec.

Thanks all for the feedback. I think I have the info I need.

What? No, this is categorically incorrect.

Also incorrect.

ALSO incorrect.

Regular Missions and Burner Missions are 100% the same everywhere, hi or low or null. For some factions you might be offered a different selection of Regular Missions, but if they have beef with Archangels you’re going to get Angel Extravaganza just the same whether it’s from Minmattar corps or from Blood Raiders agents in Delve.

Rat loot and bounties are the same everywhere for mission rats. A Burner Hawk is just as likely to drop a CN BCU in hi as in low or null. Also they are worth 5 mil in bounty whether you’re in hi/low/null.

I guess the only thing is mission rat bounties can get partially hoovered by the ESS and affected by the sov bounty multiplier thing when the mission sites take place in null sov systems, mostly a concern in Pure Blind for Mordus/SOE, Fountain for the Serpentis/Archangels agents there, and Curse for that one Serpentis L4 agent people farm missions from. But if you’re mostly running Burners for the LP, the isk you get from bounties is peanuts compared to the value of the LP in null anyway.

The only difference between hi/low/null is the Isk/LP Rewards you get from turning in completed missions: Missions - EVE University Wiki The increase in LP going from 1.0 to 0.5 (0.4 trusec rounded up to 0.5 hisec), or from there to 0.2/0.1 lowsec or further down to -0.1/-0.2 trusec in null is significant enough to warrant interest and the headaches that come with low/null.

1 Like

Mission rewards are automatically balanced based on mission usage. Period.


Educate yourself before you talk nonsense. Especially before you indulge your necrophilia and unbury a dead topic.


They are not.

1 Like

Burner Mission Rewards are Horrible! - EVE General Discussion - EVE Online Forums > [Hyperion] Burner Missions - Test Server Feedback - EVE Online Forums > [Hyperion] Burner Missions - Test Server Feedback - EVE Online Forums

They are. Nothing has changed since then on how mission rewards are being balanced. Just because you don’t notice changes, does not mean that they are not balanced automatically based on a number of factors.

If you think that this is not the case anymore, would you care to show a dev blog, dev post or other source proving your claim. As it stands, my sources trump your unfounded claim.


The reward and bonus the agent pays you, along with the loyalty points are adjusted based on global past completion data for each mission.

There is a base value assigned by CCP when they created (and tested?) each mission. It is based on estimated completion time and difficulty.

However, the base values are only seen when the missions are first put into game (or in the past when some major changes were done to missions)

After that the rewards change dynamically. The quicker everyone completes a mission on average, it will decrease the reward, bonus and points. The converse is also true. However, note there are clear upper and lower limits. Therefore it will never go below or above a certain point.

Once the mission has been completed enough times by enough people the average completion time will becomes ‘almost static’ which is why the rewards eventually seems to stabilize.

All the above does NOT apply to bounties and loot. Bounties and loot = From fixed tables, Not affected by security level of system, Not affected by completion time.

1 Like

What Moonrise said about the loyalty points is true. They have a multiplier that is affected by the true security status of the system where the agent is.

Before I knew about the formula I always used a “rule of thumb” of 10% difference per 0.1 sec status, which approximated it closely enough for me. It was just based on what I personally saw about points paid by agents in different locations.

Here is the formula as far as players have worked it out, from Uniwiki:
LP reward = (1.6288 - System security) × Base LP

Agent System Sec. % LP Points x Base Value % Compared to 1.0 Sec Agent
1.0 -37% N/A
0.9 -27% +16%
0.8 -17% +32%
0.7 -7% +48%
0.6 +3% +64%
0.5 +13% +80%
0.4 +23% +95%
0.3 +33% +111%
0.2 +43% +127%
0.1 +53% +143%
0.0 +63% +159%
-0.1 +73% +175%
-0.2 +83% +191%
-0.3 +93% +207%
-0.4 +103% +223%
-0.5 +113% +239%
-0.6 +123% +254%
-0.7 +133% +270%
-0.8 +143% +286%
-0.9 +153% +302%
-1.0 +163% +318%

The above table and formula does not include the modifier calculated from past completion time data. So the actual formula is really more along this line: LP reward = (1.6288 - System security) × Base LP x Completion Time Modifier … but exactly how much the last part is, and what else CCP has in their formula is unknown.

1 Like

Actually, it does.

When you can’t see change, then that’s the definition of something static.
Whether or not it is “supposed to” change does not matter.

I don’t need to provide you anything. You are wrong, and your insulting tone on previous posts disregard you as worthy of any effort. You are wrong, and that’s it.

Well, then Fozzie is wrong, too. And so are official statements about the mechanic behind the automatic balancing of mission rewards. Good that you clarified that for us and enlightened us with your infallible wisdom. Just one thing:

Who was talking about the rewards being static? And what has the “static” nature of rewards to do with them being automatically balanced and adjusted? :thinking: Fozzie himself said that the rewards will level out eventually into an equilibrium state. But I forgot, Fozzie’s statement was wrong. My bad.


No, but you are .

Ah, of course. I pretty much copy-paste what Fozzie said and I am wrong, but Fozzie himself is not. :thinking: Oh dear… By the way, you keep responding. Am I worthy the effort after all? :smiley:


Indeed you are.

Very well then. You have not pointed out what is wrong, you can’t prove your statements right with facts, while my statement is supported by CCP itself. I am satisfied with my “wrongness” because you can’t prove the “wrongness” anyway, and thus your claim is just amusement material for the greater community. :slight_smile: