Because it’s not.
Why are you having a hard time understanding this?
You think whining on the forums will get CCP to magically change this game mechanic because you don’t like it?
I have no idea how much of a problem it is today. But I do know that it happened to me when I was doing (storyline?) missions back in the day and coupled with other factors led to me quitting and not looking back. I also know that there are several forum posts, both here and in the archives, that talk about this and offer various solutions (some better than others…). And finally… we have someone who actively admitted to being one such griefer in this very thread!
This isn’t about what veterans can do to work around it. Like I said in the OP, it’s little more than an annoyance for them because even if it does happen, you can just get the mission reset. The problem is newer players who are just trying to enjoy the missions end up seeing the worst parts of EVE’s underbelly and are left to question whether they want to play in a game that actively (either by design or by negligence) encourages griefing other players.
And this isn’t consistent with other mechanics. High sec exists for a reason. It’s not supposed to be risk free, but it also isn’t supposed to screw you just for trying to do a mission. Unless you’re a veteran who’s already done all the missions anyway, you have no realistic chance against your invader, and are completely at their mercy. Contrast this with miners, who can be significantly weaker than their attacker, but as long as they are paying attention and can last long enough, Concord will “protect” them (by destroying the attacker first).
I’ve seen plenty of ideas that are obviously against the spirit of EVE, like instances or preventing others from picking up the mission item. This by comparison makes perfect sense and is self balancing. Someone kidnapping a diplomat should raise red flags with Concord just like attacking another player does. And this would still make missions that go into low sec or null sec just as dangerous as any other action there.
Alright, I’ll answer this again. The reason for this is because CCP when they designed missions 20 years ago did not think of this as a consideration. It would require CCP gutting out missions and coding in special rules for loot within mission sites. As I am 99.99% sure that will break the game as we have seen every patch. Hope this helps.
What you just said could apply to literally any change that has been made since EVE was released 20 some years ago. CCP really doesn’t need you to hold water for them and tell them what they can and can’t change in the game. Unless you have CCP actually saying this is the case?
You’re right. High sec won’t try to screw with you when you’re trying to do a mission.
But other capsuleers, like me, will.
The question is, how is the mission runner going to respond when a wrench is tossed into their otherwise bland mission?
Will they play along?
Will they pay the ransom?
Will they shoot at you?
Will they call in friends to shoot at you?
Will they walk away and cancel the mission?
Will they quit the game and come back to the forums years later and complain about it?
The options are quite varied and plentiful.
Quite literally a choose your own adventure novel!
Really sucks that you’re trying to gaslight us, and pigeon hole players into thinking that there is only one outcome. The one you chose to do.
2 Likes
Not in high sec. You’re basically applying low sec rules to high sec interactions. In high sec, Concord is literally there so that the risk reward equation favors more passive play. For the passive “carebears”, this means much lower risk but also much lower reward. For the assbears, this means higher risk, lower reward, but easier target.
And you’re claiming I’m gaslighting when you’re the one pretending that missions and mining in high sec should treat assbears differently? All your “options” either suck for the victim, or are unrealistic for the very players impacted by this problem!
(seriously, you expect new players to just “call in friends” in a game all about trusting no one?)
Not that it matters, but in my case I actually looked up what could be done about it after the assbear upped their ransom price and communications broke down. Learned a fair amount, and got a GM to reset the mission. Kept playing for a while longer, but it always left a bad taste in my mouth that the “solution” is literally to ask a GM to fix your mission. Then when things happened that led me to stop playing, any time I considered coming back I remembered the community. Who wants to play a game where the game actively encourages players to grief other players?
Which is a pity, since I actually enjoyed flying around in space.
Ah, I see the issue.
You don’t actually know or understand what CONCORDS function is.
It’s there, to enforce against capsuleer on capsuleer aggression. As in, open firing upon another capsuleer in high sec.
This is why CONCORD doesn’t exist in low sec or in null.
Stealing someones mission item is not open capsuleer agression.
You really should learn about the the C and P in this game before making comments on and more importantly trying to make changes to it.
3 Likes
No, missions are unique in this regard. CCP has pretty much touched and improved on EVERY aspect of this game except missions/incursions. Wonder why? 
Concord avenges. It doesn’t protect. PULLED concord guards the area. it doesn’t protect. Protecting is doing preventative work to keep something safe.
To be honest I ran out of stuff to say on this topic. Don’t expect missions to get patched/fixed anytime soon. Hasn’t happened in forever. I don’t want to get your hopes up man. It’s like if incursions had a balance pass. (Hasn’t happened since CCP created it)
We can argue this all day long and propose solutions that will just fall into the sands of forum time.
You know what, I am sure 99.9% of us can agree missions need a complete rework. Missions are dated and old compared to the rest of the game. Would love new UI, new mission sites, updated dead space rooms, and more.
2 Likes
That’s cheating in a sandbox game
1 Like
Semantics. Also, you’re wrong about them only avenging. They are entirely capable of stopping an attacker before the attacker can kill the defender.
To be honest I ran out of stuff to say on this topic. Don’t expect missions to get patched/fixed anytime soon. Hasn’t happened in forever. I don’t want to get your hopes up man. It’s like if incursions had a balance pass. (Hasn’t happened since CCP created it)
Yeah, you’re probably right, which is unfortunate 
This is just me throwing my hat in the ring since I didn’t see this particular idea thrown out. Given the similar forum posts and CCP history, I never expected much of anything to come of this. Still better to try than just give up, though.
1 Like
That’s literally what the forums recommend you do.
The attacker needs to shoot first is the key here. Concord doesn’t preemptively shoot gankers.
Ah. Another person falls to the bandwagon fallacy.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to imply here.
Look up what to do if your mission item gets stolen. There’s plenty of forum posts about it. Recommendations range from “suck it up” to “pay someone to kill the thief” to “have a GM (or downtime) reset the mission”.
Gankers haven’t done anything until they shoot or disable the ship. That’s why I’m saying stealing a mission item should be a criminal level offense. You might not even get the mission item back, but it would give actual counterplay for newer players if this happens to them. Ideally, it would force the thief to actually kill the mission runner (with the same Concord protection a miner gets) if they want to actually steal the item successfully. At worst, the thief would have to grab the item, quickly warp away and hide it somewhere in the system, and then pick it up again before the victim can get it. And of course, their ship would be forfeit, making this only viable on the higher value mission items.
if you cant accept the simple game mechanics then nobody can help you …
Agression is attacking you that you risk your ship
“stealing” is just looting and you got suspect then everybody can shoot you because it wasn´t your loot you are looting…
very easy game mechanics ! nothing to change just because you are thinking “stealing” some crap loot is a mayor problem in EvE oO
EDIT: there is no other counterplay then “dont be a victim”
If it was “crap loot”, then assbears wouldn’t be ransoming it…
if you get a ransom offer and you are thinking about it then also nobody can help you … ignore it if this happens
maybe it happens 1 time in 1000 missions or smth… nothing special to crate a forum Thread and discuss this ■■■■■■■■ over hours or days ! Accept the simple rule that its not a criminal act because of missing agression and this discuss can be finished
If you’re not interested in this topic, you are more than welcome to not engage in it. But it is not for you to decide what others care about.
if you get a ransom offer and you are thinking about it then also nobody can help you … ignore it if this happens
Case in point why this is griefing: only newer players won’t know about this. Rookies, basically.
Or as the veterans call them, “carebears” (cue a bunch of people trying to claim that carebears aren’t largely just new players not prepared to fight the veterans on equal terms).
1 Like
no its not the “newer player” the act as victim ! the player who are resist to lern are always victims and they can be 20 years ingame ! if they want to be a victim then they are a victim !
And because criminal timer :
Thats the Point of CCP ! They dont change it because 1 in a million got stolen a worthless item ( yes its worthless if its not on the market for billions )
2 Likes
Ah, yes, victim blaming. Because it’s always the victim’s fault. I know blaming the victim is popular in EVE, but it’s also a good way to lose customers. You’d best tread lightly with that mindset or you’ll lose the rest of the carebears.
( yes its worthless if its not on the market for billions )
Just because you’ve been around for 6 years and can make a billion by sneezing doesn’t mean a new player can do the same.
Never go out in a ship you can’t afford to lose… and never do any missions, because sometimes the reward will be worth more than your ship, and it might get stolen. Doesn’t really roll off the tongue if you put it that way though.
By the way…
In a high-security space, activating any offensive module on another player’s ship, capsule, or assets
Sounds an awful lot like this should apply to literally stealing mission items. You can argue semantics all day about “ownership” and “attacking”, but from a practical standpoint, commandeering an item that is for another player, can only be used by that player, and is otherwise worthless for other players, is hardly different than if you could just… pick up a player’s drones and then run away with them scot free. Hell, at least the drones would have value for the thief directly!
Stealing mission items is no different than stealing someones loot from a wreck. You get suspect timer. Its not that big of a crime to warrant CONCORD to come destroy your ship
1 Like