Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Lucky Hydra Corp SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 17:01:00 -
[1]
Originally by: SonOTassadar
The solution is dynamic rewards. This has been requested of CCP for about 2 years now: rewards and costs should be dynamic. If 10,000 people in Jita want to run missions there because it is safe, well, the advantage is in the employer, so pay goes down, bounties go down, LP goes down - this is a real world example that would fit nicely here. On the contrary, If an agent in .2 space that has pirates camping it 10 hours a day -- the agent is practically selling his arm and first-born child to get a pod pilot to run missions for him.
This would allow for agent quality to stay (which should have been removed a long time ago if they were never going to add dynamic rewards/bills), and in fact you could have more profound agent quality. Say, for instance, that same Jita agent would have a quality of -100, and the low-sec agent could be as high as +100. You could have low-sec L4 agents paying out as much as 20,000,000 ISK per mission, and the bounties could potentially hit 100,000,000. As more people mission using the same agent, the quality would go down. Conversely, if the number of missions ran by X agent in Y timespan goes down, the quality goes up.
As far as bills go: same concept. The cost of living in New York City, home to 8.2 million people in 1,214 sq. km area (10,194 people per sq. km) is vastly more expensive than, say, Beeville, Texas - having a total population (13,129) in a 16 sq. km that barely exceeds a sq. km of NYC. Housing is cheaper their while pay at any job is going to have a higher ratio than in NYC.
The same concept needs to be applied to Eve: Office renters should be raking in the dough from corporations and such because everyone and their brother needs an office. Office renters in low-sec are probably considering foreclosing. Dynamic pricing: things even out. It would cost next-to-nothing for a low-sec office, but it should take a small fortune to run an office in one of the trade hubs. Again, the more people renting means the price goes up, and the less people renting and the price goes down.
One of the better ideas I've seen posted here. This would throw the entire mission running scene through a loop, and make both High and low sec much more interesting. A lot of details need to be looked at, such as the rate of change and the timetable for a return to normal quality, but all in all a good idea.
This would mean the more adventurous players would be out hunting for out of the way systems to gain windfall profits from hard-pressed employers. Plus, think of the positive impact (for the players) this will have on the isk selling problem? All of those farmed mission lines are suddenly worthless to them in a matter of time.
This is something I think we should look more into. It would cause people to explore different mission sets so they have more opportunity to cash in on good mission systems while they last.
(Quote edited for readability)
|
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Lucky Hydra Corp SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 19:55:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Ulstan
Quote: Lower the profits in hi-sec and the rest should happen by itself.
As pointed out numerous times, that won't actually change anything, except perhaps make a few people leave the game.
It'll only make those leave who refuse to adapt. The game's managed to continue on when people left their stuff behind before.
That said, I really do support the idea of a dynamically set agent quality that was described earlier.
|