|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2765
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 17:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'll keep this brief for all you TL;DRers.
The problem: For a lot of LP store items, it is simply unprofitable (even, in some cases, virtually impossible) to acquire the tags required to purchase items, due to really low drop rates of particular tags. In addition, the distribution of antifaction missions is really lopsided (for example, in Gallente space, the main antifaction missions are Pot and Kettle and In the Midst of Deadspace...where the enemy is Amarr. Nice going, CCP!).
The solution: Split the distribution of missions, so that either wholly anti-pirate or anti-faction missions are offered. When a capsuleer first approaches their agent, for example, a dialogue box would pop up asking "Hello [name], I can offer you a choice of either political or law and order missions. Which one would you like take?"
I'm sure there are problems somewhere with this but I don't have the time to intricately go through them now. I will later, though.
Thanks for your comments/ideas/supports/trolls.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2766
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 18:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nice idea. The idea you proposed is essentially the same as mine :) I meant to clarify in the OP that the choice wouldn't be permanent - you could always back out of, say, choosing political missions and instead go with anti-pirate.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2766
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 18:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yes, looking back over the OP I really meant to add that in lol :) well done for bringing it out to the fore :P
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2767
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 19:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Thanks - your suggestion in your first post helps the old and senile to focus their thoughts :)
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2777
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 10:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Sounds like a new spin on the "Oh noes, my precious standings" argument .. clever ploy to use tags as the basis for it, I'll grant you that.
---Warning: Product may contain elements of RP--- Remove ALL tags from high-sec missions, the idea that enemies are allowed to set up shop within the sovereign/policed borders of an Empire's space is ludicrous .. I mean just how bad is the military command structure if they outsource eradication of such cells to lowly station agents.
Tags in FW are plentiful, were they to become a major export item we'd have something to help keep afloat that the solo-bombers can't touch (mainly plexers and 'proper' mission runners who hoard tags). Tags (ie. anti-faction missions) in LS in general makes heaps more sense as navy patrols are few so it is reasonable that an enemy could haul in umpteen megatons of gear to set up a forward base .. would create a market/product dependency between high- and other-sec much closer to what was originally intended in regards to ore, goo etc. ...
You could of course still have your button saying that you want to fight for the Empire in question, the mission would merely take place in nearby LS system and be concluded with agent suggesting you sign up for the militia proper! .. hahahahaha.
No, this has nothing to do with standings, and everything to do with the brokeness of the LP store requirements.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2792
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 10:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Thank you for everyone's support :)
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2799
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 10:04:00 -
[7] - Quote
Back to the top :)
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2823
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 09:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
I had thought that one potential objection to this change would be that the prices of LP store items would fall quite dramatically, hurting professional contract traders (such as myself). However, I would be willing to take this hit so that the true splendour of the LP store can be attained.
Any thoughts?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2834
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 09:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
I was wondering about your crazy Faction Repair Chit thing - insane :P
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2840
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 12:24:00 -
[10] - Quote
What? Are you serious? If you really have been playing for seven years - or at the very least, paying attention to things - then you can't fail to have noticed how, for instance, they nerfed the market value of meta 4 prop mods by vastly increasing the drop rate.
This proposal is only to increase the tag supply to make the LP stores...you know...viable.
Please understand the proposal before posting.
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
|
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2884
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 10:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
What are you dribbling about? I exclusively want to fun anti-faction missions.
e: I believe that the only joke here is what you wrote - because you obviously don't comprehend the situation as it stands and, instead, you rattle on and on about god knows what, but certainly not related to the OP.
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2898
|
Posted - 2012.02.26 09:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Do you not think that the tag requirements for all items are pretty ludicrous, especially since they were set way before FW and the like were twinkles in CCP's eyes - which makes it all the more ridiculous. Additionally, seeing as the distribution of anti-faction missions is mind-bogglingly stupid (anti-Amarr missions for Gallente, anyone?), something definitely has to be done, and forcing people to go out into low and null who simply don't want to leave high sec will accomplish nothing.
CCP seriously needs to look at this situation - it's not a matter of boosting mission running, it's a question of fixing the broken LP stores.
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2902
|
Posted - 2012.02.27 08:31:00 -
[13] - Quote
Plaude Pollard wrote:mxzf wrote:I'm not seeing much of an issue with this. I would suggest putting another two buttons next to the "Request Mission" button for the agent and have them be "Request anti-pirate mission" and "Request anti-faction mission", which would actually help both the missioners that care about their standings (no more 4h waiting period) and the missioners who want tags to sell (no more pirate missions with no tags). And there would still be the "Request Mission" giving out completely random missions for people who just don't care.
With any luck, and enough people running anti-faction missions for the tags, this could help to drive down tag prices (which I would see as a very good thing). As long as all three options remain a choice at all times, and you don't lock yourself into a certain set when you first talk to the agent, it sounds fine to me. I support this idea. I don't know how many times I've been grinding missions for fun and ISK, only to suddenly receive an anti-Amarr mission (funny enough, it's always anti-Amarr missions. Never the other Empire-factions) and have to stop running missions for another 4 hours. It's really annoying when you're already hated by the Amarr, and actually want to improve standings with them by working for their "allies", until you get access to better Amarr-missions... As for the tag-market, I don't know how that looks. I generally only work for SOE or buy Faction Ammo from other factions, because it's just too bothersome getting those stupid tags for the marginally better faction-modules.
If you support that, like the OP captain - the ideas are the same
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2927
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 09:26:00 -
[14] - Quote
Back to the top - some good ideas here, let's discuss this some more! - OP updated with mxzf's suggestion
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2929
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 18:42:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ah, see there, there's the thing - there are people (probably not many!) like myself, who would exclusively run anti-faction missions if i) the option was offered to us and ii) the distribution of the missions (namely, a Gallente agent offering anti-Caldari missions and vice versa. If these conditions were changed, the tags would flow...true there would be some tag value deflation with increased availability, but of course not everyone will want to run the anti-empire missions :)
Don't forget that this proposal, Diamaht, is exlcusively concerned with increasing the tag supply via the choice of exclusive anti-faction missions; it's not about looking at the tag requirements in the LP stores (as the increase tag supply will rectify the disproportionate requirements).
Thanks for your support!
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2942
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 08:29:00 -
[16] - Quote
I think you're talking about a rather more radical, revolutionary overhaul of the LP/tags system than the evolutionary model presented here. I think it is quite important to preserve rat bounties (whether at their present levels, who knows...) because, as we know, diversity is fun!
In a way, too, I think it would greatly overcomplicate things - imagine, after a couple of months of missioning and hoarding, you look in your hangar and are faced with dozens and dozens of different types of tag, and you think "WTF". I believe that the current system holds the basis for a new, workable tags system - give the pilot the choice whether to fly anti-pirate or anti-faction missions exclusively (or the current random system, for those who truly don't care). You must also remember that the distribution of anti-faction missions for ALL factions is completely borked too, by the way...
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
2961
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 12:19:00 -
[17] - Quote
Tsubutai wrote:If you want to run anti-faction missions and get tags, you can take them as they come in highsec, move to lowsec and do FW missions/plexes or L5s, or move to nullsec and do pirate missions. There's plenty of options for amassing as many tags as you could possibly want.
No. There is a fundamental imbalance in the distribution of tags AND the tag requirements in the LP store to effectively render most of the items in there totally unobtainable. It's not simply a matter of 'Go and run FW/Lvl 5 missions'
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
3313
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 16:27:00 -
[18] - Quote
I sincerely believe that this issue will solve a lot of problems, if implemented :)
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
3313
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 16:35:00 -
[19] - Quote
Arduemont wrote:Supported.
Thanks
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
3388
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 16:03:00 -
[20] - Quote
The thing is, though, is that there are quite a lot of people who have said 'to hell with my opposing faction's standings, I just love Enemies Abound (or w/e)', and don't decline anti-faction missions. Some of these are RPers, to be sure, but I can't be the only person to have noticed that, once you hoover all of those tags from 'Smash the Supplier' up, the collective pay (including loot, as well as everything else) is often substantially better than a similarly sized lvl4 mission. It is for this reason that I love anti-faction missions.
I'm not 100% convinced that this would just be another gushing ISK faucet. What happens if, as you say, the number of people running them drops, and the price of faction equipment goes up? Well, surely in a sandbox environment like ours, quick thinking people will recognise this and move into doing faction missions to take advantage of the premium that tags would now command. Presumably this would continue until equilibrium had been achieved.
You also said that people might not have to wait at all before declining missions, and they might therefore just mission away without any impediment. However, the reality of the situation is that - provided your faction standings are high enough - you can essentially decline mission after mission with really negligible faction hits. I would also say that perhaps mission travel times are a bigger factor than declining missions, but that's just my opinion and not really relavent here :)
Thank you for your input so far!
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
|
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
3389
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 16:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
That's probably quite a big 'if', and might not fully solve the intrinsic problems with the LP store - tag drop relationship that exist at the moment. A lot of it, in my opinion, stems from the godawful distribution of anti-faction missions.
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
4174
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 14:40:00 -
[22] - Quote
Back to the front - let's not let this (if I may say so) great idea idle :)
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
|
|
|