Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.11 11:33:58 -
[1] - Quote
Add mission agents as a services available at citadels - have it so that a citadel owner can pick amongst npc corporations that are available in his area to install at the citadel - with the level and type of the agents being upgradeable (consistent with any restrictions on agent type/level in that area - thus you could not create something like a lvl 5 caldari navy agent in amarr high sec space since lvl 5 agents are restricted to lowsec). As a reward for housing the agent the citadel owner gets a percentage of the bounties/mission reward that is earned by the players that perform the mission as their reward/tax for housing the agent.
To make this system feasible - I would also impose a similar tax on mission agents at npc stations with the npc corporations that house the agents in their stations getting a piece of the action that the players earn from completing the mission.
Finally, I would make mission agents in npc stations dynamic - from time to time have them relocate from the station they are in to another station within their control. I would make it so that agents move as a general rule from areas where there is high player activity to areas where there is lower activity. The effect of this is that players who use agents will move around more following their preferred agents which may result in conflict - or they will reside at player citadels where agents are static. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4467
|
Posted - 2016.06.11 18:43:05 -
[2] - Quote
Define 'NPC corps available in the area'.
Could I put one up in sov null, install pirate agents, and print machariels all day? |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.11 19:33:45 -
[3] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Define 'NPC corps available in the area'.
Could I put one up in sov null, install pirate agents, and print machariels all day?
For lore reasons I would say that whatever restrictions exist now would continue to exist in the proposed system - thus you cant have amarr in caldari space and vice versa, but you could have soe pretty much everywhere agents are allowed. As for Null/wh - agents are not allowed in either except for wh space so I would imagine that those restrictions would be kept. As for the pirate agents - since they are limited now to lowsec/npc null (i think) then they would be limited to those areas in the new system.
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4467
|
Posted - 2016.06.11 23:02:50 -
[4] - Quote
Doesn't that make the whole thing rather pointless? |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
2131
|
Posted - 2016.06.12 05:08:37 -
[5] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Doesn't that make the whole thing rather pointless?
There are a few groups that like to play the game because they enjoy it. Not everyone logs in to exploit and abuse game mechanics. (not pointing fingers or judging anyone - just pointing out that there are different approaches to the game)
Pointless is a point of view. |
Do Little
Virgin Plc Evictus.
296
|
Posted - 2016.06.12 06:45:29 -
[6] - Quote
I expect to see a fairly substantial overhaul of PVE over the next year or so. CCP haven't been saying much but they have been doing a lot. They have been play testing new AI over the past year with the drifters and it looks like they are play testing the Tribute system mentioned at Eve Vegas last year with the "Shadow of the Serpent" event at the end of this month - where missions are offered rather than requested and increase in value the more you do them.
It wouldn't surprise me if this system is adaptive and offers content suited to your play style. I also expect to see more open space PVE based on the new AI - I particularly like the notion introduced with capital rats that they can escape from their dungeon and cause havoc in the system.
This leads me to believe that the existing mission will be deprecated rather than enhanced with the goal of eventually phasing it out. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4468
|
Posted - 2016.06.12 11:43:56 -
[7] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Doesn't that make the whole thing rather pointless? There are a few groups that like to play the game because they enjoy it. Not everyone logs in to exploit and abuse game mechanics. (not pointing fingers or judging anyone - just pointing out that there are different approaches to the game) Pointless is a point of view.
If it doesn't allow you to put agents in places where there are not already agents of that corporation/level, then it is kind of redundant, is it not? |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 01:42:10 -
[8] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Doesn't that make the whole thing rather pointless? There are a few groups that like to play the game because they enjoy it. Not everyone logs in to exploit and abuse game mechanics. (not pointing fingers or judging anyone - just pointing out that there are different approaches to the game) Pointless is a point of view. If it doesn't allow you to put agents in places where there are not already agents of that corporation/level, then it is kind of redundant, is it not?
The point is not to put agents where they already are not - but rather to give citadels more utility - to make them more home like for players. Right now stations are very powerful - they pretty much do everything a player in eve could want. With citadels stations are being chipped away at - one whole stream of use (mining) has been essentially given over to citadels. This however is only part of the picture - many players do not mine. If you do not mine then you have no real reason to use a citadel (unless you consider the free repair useful or do pvp and want to use the clone facilities or have access to a large for the market). IMO it would be cool if agents could be added to citadels to make them more relevant to the rest of the pve players in high sec. That is all. |
Xaros IX
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 06:54:37 -
[9] - Quote
That would break the monopoly of lvl5 system hubs, provided that everyone could access the agent. Otherwise its very selective. As for the small percentage fee, well no, thats way too easy money. Citadel owners would benefit from tax on the market, buying and selling stuff out of their mission citadel.
Agents in high / low sec work fine as is. What would be interesting to see is mission agents in 0.0 through citadels. That way all bears will be happy making iskies. Also it would be nice to see citadel owners crafting new missions, provided they are hard enough for system's sec status. Maybe CCP can create a mission crafting thread and receive mission designs, so that they can be tested / approved/ thrown away.
Implementation needs a lot of work, but it could have a bright future, That would give back life to poor regions without many stations (GW springs to mind) |
Lan Wang
Knights of the posing meat FETID
3133
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 08:56:06 -
[10] - Quote
do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve.
FETID now recruiting pvp pilots & corporations | lowsec pvp & piracy - Join FETID
Loyalist to Angel Cartel & Serpentis
|
|
Xaros IX
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 09:30:59 -
[11] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve.
Well no, not really, but since npc space offers missions, maybe you can open up options.
As for moving around to different regions of eve, the carrier enabled that with its 13ly jump range once upon a time, but got nerfed and became a local asset ( a side effect of power projection nerf). Also people dont move around once they get settled in lvl5 systems. They actually do everything in their power to farm 5s for themselves.
Exploring all the options you can get out of citadels isn't really counterproductive. Obviously it needs to be well thought out before implementation. But it is an option
|
Lan Wang
Knights of the posing meat FETID
3133
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 10:05:18 -
[12] - Quote
Xaros IX wrote:Lan Wang wrote:do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve. Well no, not really, but since npc space offers missions, maybe you can open up options. As for moving around to different regions of eve, the carrier enabled that with its 13ly jump range once upon a time, but got nerfed and became a local asset ( a side effect of power projection nerf). Also people dont move around once they get settled in lvl5 systems. They actually do everything in their power to farm 5s for themselves. Exploring all the options you can get out of citadels isn't really counterproductive. Obviously it needs to be well thought out before implementation. But it is an option
i think mission agents dont really need to be diluted and cancered to large block alliances, giving ratters an option to either farm the hell out havens or farm the hell out of mission agents lp stores will just have a seriously bad impact on the smaller groups who choose not to be part of these huge blue donut groups deep in nullsec.
"Exploring all the options you can get out of citadels isn't really counterproductive" - personally i think its the opposite, its over-productive
FETID now recruiting pvp pilots & corporations | lowsec pvp & piracy - Join FETID
Loyalist to Angel Cartel & Serpentis
|
Xaros IX
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 11:02:30 -
[13] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote: i think mission agents dont really need to be diluted and cancered to large block alliances, giving ratters an option to either farm the hell out havens or farm the hell out of mission agents lp stores will just have a seriously bad impact on the smaller groups who choose not to be part of these huge blue donut groups deep in nullsec.
Farming the hell out of havens is already happening. Nobody said anything about lps, its an obvious expectation out of missions but lp stores revolve around npc corps. Citadel Mission agents could have double isk rewards or some other incentive that wouldn't negate the value of lps. So agents wouldn't provide missions per se, for now lets dub it a new set of escalations or beacons.
Big Blocks already farm the hell out of lvl5s, implants have lost their value, tags and faction modules / ammo are also into a downwards slope due to vast availability. Citadel Agents is just another isk generating option, you will have to forge alliances as it stands with low sec and npc 0.0. Otherwise you are stuck with lvl4s mission wise. Citadel agents will have the added bonus of 0 standings requirement. You could add some flexibility as to whether you want combat missions or R&D. Now you have more options for datacores within your own locality. You build your world and your options.
Overally, its not a bad idea, you just have to approach it carefully. Lest we forget FW. They literally destroyed the implants and hardwiring market with lps, but also took care of the lvl5 monopoly. So for Citadel agents, you need a robust design from the very beginning. |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 13:54:55 -
[14] - Quote
Xaros IX wrote:That would break the monopoly of lvl5 system hubs, provided that everyone could access the agent. Otherwise its very selective. As for the small percentage fee, well no, thats way too easy money. Citadel owners would benefit from tax on the market, buying and selling stuff out of their mission citadel.
Agents in high / low sec work fine as is. What would be interesting to see is mission agents in 0.0 through citadels. That way all bears will be happy making iskies. Also it would be nice to see citadel owners crafting new missions, provided they are hard enough for system's sec status. Maybe CCP can create a mission crafting thread and receive mission designs, so that they can be tested / approved/ thrown away.
Implementation needs a lot of work, but it could have a bright future, That would give back life to poor regions without many stations (GW springs to mind)
Yes the effect of this would be to break the monopoly of lvl5 hubs. The same thing right now is going on with markets - ccp is giving players the tool to attack market hubs like jita and amarr, imo the same reasoning justifies giving players the tools to break up the agent hubs.
As for it being easy money - well I disagree with that. A citadel owner puts a lot on the line in setting up a citadel. For a lvl 5 citadel agent i imagine that a player would have to set up a low sec citadel and fit it with the most expensive fittings associated with an agent system (just like if you want the best reprocessing you have to fit t2 ice rigs). This means that the citadel owner is hanging a bling fit citadel in a static location in space which makes it a very attractive kill mail. Having to outfit, maintain and successfully defend the citadel means that any iskies earned will be more then deserved. |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 14:02:00 -
[15] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Xaros IX wrote:Lan Wang wrote:do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve. Well no, not really, but since npc space offers missions, maybe you can open up options. As for moving around to different regions of eve, the carrier enabled that with its 13ly jump range once upon a time, but got nerfed and became a local asset ( a side effect of power projection nerf). Also people dont move around once they get settled in lvl5 systems. They actually do everything in their power to farm 5s for themselves. Exploring all the options you can get out of citadels isn't really counterproductive. Obviously it needs to be well thought out before implementation. But it is an option i think mission agents dont really need to be diluted and cancered to large block alliances, giving ratters an option to either farm the hell out havens or farm the hell out of mission agents lp stores will just have a seriously bad impact on the smaller groups who choose not to be part of these huge blue donut groups deep in nullsec. "Exploring all the options you can get out of citadels isn't really counterproductive" - personally i think its the opposite, its over-productive
Well in the system I propose - agents couldnt be placed where none are allowed now - so you couldnt place an agent in sov null sec for the large alliances to farm. But even if you could, so what? Sov alliances are allowed to greatly upgrade their systems so that they can farm havens and the like all day so I dont see how this would be different except that it would give more variety to player activities - different things to do rather then just killing the same rats over and over again.
As for the lp store - yes I envision that this will have an impact, but it will be a player/market driven impact. For instance, if players all start installing soe agents such that they become more accessible, I expect that more players will run them which will drive the price for their lp items down, which will in turn drive citadel owners to install other agent types - creating an endless market driven cycle.
|
Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat FETID
3135
|
Posted - 2016.06.13 14:11:52 -
[16] - Quote
Jones Beach wrote:But even if you could, so what?
because it wrecks the lp market for every other player who does missions as a sole income in favour of big alliances. yeah null is already overfarmed by big alliances we dont need it transferred into missions, especially not lvl 5's which make such a large amount of money
FETID now recruiting pvp pilots & corporations | lowsec pvp & piracy - Join FETID
Loyalist to Angel Cartel & Serpentis
|
Bubba Raye
River Run Black Fish
0
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 07:10:20 -
[17] - Quote
I would say why not just make the local mission agents available to be used from the citadel instead of having to dock up at the station they are at. Allow you to accept and complete missions from the citadel. For instance, you like to run missions in X system, you set up a citadel there, and dock and have access to the mission agent you are using. make it still a fitting like a "mission comms" or something like that. this way we are not adding mission agents. |
Xaros IX
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 12:28:44 -
[18] - Quote
Bubba Raye wrote:I would say why not just make the local mission agents available to be used from the citadel instead of having to dock up at the station they are at. Allow you to accept and complete missions from the citadel. For instance, you like to run missions in X system, you set up a citadel there, and dock and have access to the mission agent you are using. make it still a fitting like a "mission comms" or something like that. this way we are not adding mission agents.
That could actually work.
Corp standings to faction determine availability, and distance (in ly or jumps) to original station within the region determine penalty to lps and mission payout. System true sec also plays a role and for lvl5s you need to build your citadel in low sec. No need to be in same system, would defeat the purpose of citadel agents. And takes care of mission hub monopoly.
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
876
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 13:19:34 -
[19] - Quote
-1 is my response to this and for the same reasons that I give a -1 to the request to put mission agents in citadels in a worm hole. My primary reason is that all four areas of space have certain positive and negative aspects to life there and this idea serves to remove some of those negative aspects.
Nul sec and worm holes are about controlling your own destiny free of the controls, limitations etc of the NPC corps. With this as the lore background to life in these areas what is the justification for allowing you to have NPC agents? Why would the NPC even want to have an agent in a region of space they have no control over? With no vested interest in your area of space why would they even care what went on there?
In the end my biggest complaint against this idea is the double standard that it represents. When the high sec players want something they do not have they are told to go to the areas of space where that activity is available. Yet here you are asking for CCP to add something to your area of space, something that does not exist simply because you want it. That folks is a double standard, some call it hypocrisy, so I say to you exactly what you all say to those high sec players if you want something you do not have pack up your kit bags and move to where it is available. If you do not want to move then you do not get access to that activity because in this aspect of the game fair is fair. |
Xaros IX
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 18:47:39 -
[20] - Quote
We re just contemplating all the " ifs "
Citadels got a lot of potential, missioning is just 1 of them. Any time activity is low and things getting boring (it can happen in a wormhole too) you will have something to do. No its no hypocrisy, there will be substantial limitations and penalties to it, but it will open new options. More people will be active in space == more combat probing == more goodness!!!
Id like to see a module on citadels that will allow you to open up a link to a specific wh for a short period of time, then subject to a lengthy cooldown period. Raiders AHOY. Will also make logistics trips at whs easy. So activity in whs will go up.
Missioning via citadels will be totally cool, the status quo will change, and yes, you will create any opportunities you can think of, provided you can keep em. |
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2243
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 19:44:23 -
[21] - Quote
I don't know if i agree with the specific mechanics outlined in the OP but i am for the idea in principle.
Realistically, why wouldn't capsuleers be able to invite agents to live and operate out of their citadels? Citadels are supposed to be about "building your dreams" and as long as the owner is paying for the service and other players can destroy your citadel, i don't see a problem.
However, i believe that CCP should create new missions for citadels to get around some of the issues people have raised in this thread. This could be the start of the long overdue and much needed revamp of PVE.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Sephiroth Clone VII
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
167
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 22:25:03 -
[22] - Quote
Would be great and add variety to nullsec pve or just about anywhere, to be honest anoms are boring and combat sigs olny marginaly better in terms of unique story, which is very, very small, and redundant.
Only qualms would have are.
Who would be the NPC? Would they be randomly generated or some kind of tv screen terminal. Could it be any number of factions not limited to empire ones, or just the old pirate factions like could it be ore or sisters of eve?
And.... what NPC faction or level or missions? Does it have to be the NPC faction space you are living in, lets say cva are all about amar and just as alogic standpoint like most nullsec residents we spend all ratting shooting sansha who are the home rats in our region. Considering we regulaly blow any standing with them just shooting sansha and...... well we are ammar loyalists it would aid us most to have ammar empire agents.
One idea just thought of, to keep pirate NPC space unique, that the faction for missions are kept generic and or empire related ones. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
876
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 14:58:22 -
[23] - Quote
Xaros IX wrote:No its no hypocrisy, there will be substantial limitations and penalties to it, but it will open new options. More people will be active in space == more combat probing == more goodness!!!. Yes it is hypocrisy at it finest. As a group low, nul and worm hole players are united in shouting down any request for additional content in high sec, and in telling them if they want something they do not have then they need to move to a location where that activity is available. And yet here you are asking for something to be added to your area of space, something that does not currently exist and justifying it because you are low, nul or worm hole players it is different. This is in fact the dictionary definition of hypocrisy, I can have something because I want it, but you cannot have something you want.
No I do not think high sec should get the things they do not have, if the players there want those activities they should move to where those activities are located. And the same goes for you, if you want something that does not exist in your area of space then move to where it does exist.
Rek Seven wrote:I don't know if i agree with the specific mechanics outlined in the OP but i am for the idea in principle.
Realistically, why wouldn't capsuleers be able to invite agents to live and operate out of their citadels? Citadels are supposed to be about "building your dreams" and as long as the owner is paying for the service and other players can destroy your citadel, i don't see a problem.
However, i believe that CCP should create new missions for citadels to get around some of the issues people have raised in this thread. This could be the start of the long overdue and much needed revamp of PVE. Going to ask you the same questions you have been refusing to answer in your topic about agents in worm holes.
Why would the NPC care about what happens in an area of space you control?
Why would they waste their resources putting an agent in an area of space they do not control an have no vested interest in?
How is this going to serve to add content to anyone other than the owner of the citadel?
Why do you deserve to have CCP add content to your area when you deny that same request to others simply because you live in a worm hole and they live in high sec?
We have been around this, each area of space has certain content available and that content is decided by CCP. When those in high sec want the higher end anoms etc they are told to move to where those things are available and that is how it should be. For whatever reason CCP has decided that mission are not going to be available in worm holes and in some areas of nul sec, if you live in these areas and you want to run missions then follow your own advice and go to where the missions are. |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 20:03:19 -
[24] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:
No I do not think high sec should get the things they do not have, if the players there want those activities they should move to where those activities are located. And the same goes for you, if you want something that does not exist in your area of space then move to where it does exist.
I dont propose that anybody get something that they dont already have. I actually suggest that lore restrictions on where agents can exist remain in place. Instead I propose a rebalancing of npc stations and citadels. Players should be able to have stationary agents in their citadels which would become the new hubs for agent pve in their systems (these agents would mirror the agents already in their systems) in nature the ones that already exist in their areas), while agents in npc stations would roam - creating the potential for conflict as they move from place to place and players follow them.
Whether players should be allowed to place agents in regions where they dont already exist - in wh, npc sov - or moving lvl 5 agents to places regions where they do not currently reside - is beyond the scope of my original proposal - i'm not opposed to allowing that flexibility - but clearly there is a balance question which ccp would have to resolve. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4894
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 21:06:40 -
[25] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve.
Do people move around that much with standings?
In NS, it would force people to move, not regions, but 2-3 systems. This would make it easier to catch and kill people running missions in NS as going through gates is when one is often most vulnerable.
As for loot drops there is a potential issue there. Either just have ISK rewards in NS or change the exchange rate.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat FETID
3179
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 21:20:47 -
[26] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Lan Wang wrote:do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve. Do people move around that much with standings? In NS, it would force people to move, not regions, but 2-3 systems. This would make it easier to catch and kill people running missions in NS as going through gates is when one is often most vulnerable. As for loot drops there is a potential issue there. Either just have ISK rewards in NS or change the exchange rate.
an example, when i lived in curse doing angel missions, test lived near in the nullsec sov systems, test would travel to the angel mission systems to do missions, this wouldnt happen if citadels could have agents because they could just bang them in a citadel and farm them in pretty much safety of there intel chanels etc
FETID now recruiting pvp pilots & corporations | lowsec pvp & piracy - Join FETID
Loyalist to Angel Cartel & Serpentis
|
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 00:22:02 -
[27] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Lan Wang wrote:do nullsec ratting systems really need something like this? you want to do missions then you should have to move around instead of having everything at your fingertips in a backwater nullsec system.
leave missions to npc stations which encourage people to move around to different regions of eve. Do people move around that much with standings? In NS, it would force people to move, not regions, but 2-3 systems. This would make it easier to catch and kill people running missions in NS as going through gates is when one is often most vulnerable. As for loot drops there is a potential issue there. Either just have ISK rewards in NS or change the exchange rate. an example, when i lived in curse doing angel missions, test lived near in the nullsec sov systems, test would travel to the angel mission systems to do missions, this wouldnt happen if citadels could have agents because they could just bang them in a citadel and farm them in pretty much safety of there intel chanels etc
And just for the record - that is not what i proposed - in your example my system would allow citadel agents in the areas where the angel missions were not allowed but not in the areas where test lived in their nearby sov. Thus test would have to still come to the npc sov systems to do the missions and maybe make use of any public citadels in those systems or perhaps setup their own, |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
877
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 14:05:56 -
[28] - Quote
Jones Beach wrote:I dont propose that anybody get something that they dont already have. I actually suggest that lore restrictions on where agents can exist remain in place. Instead I propose a rebalancing of npc stations and citadels. Players should be able to have stationary agents in their citadels which would become the new hubs for agent pve in their systems (these agents would mirror the agents already in their systems) in nature the ones that already exist in their areas), while agents in npc stations would roam - creating the potential for conflict as they move from place to place and players follow them. If there is already an agent in the system then who benefits from the ability to have an agent in your citadel?
Using Jaschercis as an example why would Fed Mart want to put an agent in your citadel when they already have multiple agents in that system?
Why would someone risk losing their stuff when your citadel is destroyed when they can simply go to the agent located in an NPC station in the same system knowing that their stuff is completely safe?
I have not really looked at the citadels because neither I nor my corp can afford one and we have no use for one at this point in time. Keeping that in mind if what follows is not really the problem that it appears it could be then please let me know.
If you allow me to dock today so I can run missions, what happens to my stuff if you change the profiles or access list and I can no longer dock at your citadel? Do I simply loose it all because I can no longer get to it? I was docked at your citadel when I logged off and when I log in I no longer have access rights to dock at your citadel what happens to my clone, and in fact can I even log in? If I can log in am I stuck in your citadel? When the profiles or access list is changed does my stuff and my clone get kicked into space even if I am not logged in?
Now we get to the moving agents around and the supposed creation of more chances for conflict. Whether I un-dock to go run a mission several systems away, or simply un-dock to move my stuff several systems away because the agent moved I am still just one character in space flying one ship, so please explain to me how moving the agents around from place to place will increase the chances for conflict. |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 14:08:34 -
[29] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Jones Beach wrote:I dont propose that anybody get something that they dont already have. I actually suggest that lore restrictions on where agents can exist remain in place. Instead I propose a rebalancing of npc stations and citadels. Players should be able to have stationary agents in their citadels which would become the new hubs for agent pve in their systems (these agents would mirror the agents already in their systems) in nature the ones that already exist in their areas), while agents in npc stations would roam - creating the potential for conflict as they move from place to place and players follow them. If there is already an agent in the system then who benefits from the ability to have an agent in your citadel? Using Jaschercis as an example why would Fed Mart want to put an agent in your citadel when they already have multiple agents in that system? Why would someone risk losing their stuff when your citadel is destroyed when they can simply go to the agent located in an NPC station in the same system knowing that their stuff is completely safe? I have not really looked at the citadels because neither I nor my corp can afford one and we have no use for one at this point in time. Keeping that in mind if what follows is not really the problem that it appears it could be then please let me know. If you allow me to dock today so I can run missions, what happens to my stuff if you change the profiles or access list and I can no longer dock at your citadel? Do I simply loose it all because I can no longer get to it? I was docked at your citadel when I logged off and when I log in I no longer have access rights to dock at your citadel what happens to my clone, and in fact can I even log in? If I can log in am I stuck in your citadel? When the profiles or access list is changed does my stuff and my clone get kicked into space even if I am not logged in? Now we get to the moving agents around and the supposed creation of more chances for conflict. Whether I un-dock to go run a mission several systems away, or simply un-dock to move my stuff several systems away because the agent moved I am still just one character in space flying one ship, so please explain to me how moving the agents around from place to place will increase the chances for conflict.
This isnt a question of lore. This is a question of putting more of station functions in a players hands. Hell if we want to play the lore game - why cant stations fit better reprocessing? They are pretty big - im sure if they wanted to they could upgrade and squeeze out that last 4 percent.
As for losing all your stuff -look up citadel mechanics - you cant be denied access to your stuff as you can always tigger the safety protocols. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |