26

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Hugh Ruka wrote:

10 minutes per cycle ? how do you people do that ? I tried to get from Asintec to Tellesis terminal and it took me good 15 minutes (ok it was the firs time for me to jump islands and use teleports after the rookie missions) but the terrain is quite varied usualy. so I doubt the 10 minutes per cycle a realistic. btw I ran with a naked arkhe so I guess a sequer can be faster.

Asintec to Tellesis is the faster leg. TM is what takes a little longer. The travel time between Asintec and Tellesis is nothing. It's doable in nearly the time of the molecular instability countdowns (it depends heavily on where you undock, actually).

Avatar Creations have a lot to learn about economy
-- Snowman

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Asintec to Tellesis takes a good 15 min, Asintec to ICS is fast

28

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Mouse Tiger wrote:

Asintec to Tellesis takes a good 15 min, Asintec to ICS is fast

I stand corrected. I just confused Tellesis with ICS.

But Tellesis is not part of the triangle, therefore I'm now wondering why Hugh was talking about Tellesis to begin with.

Avatar Creations have a lot to learn about economy
-- Snowman

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Scratch wrote:

I'm not asking for the courier missions to be nerfed
Scratch

But that's what we got. Not your fault

FTR the triangle caps at 7 missions on each corner, 11 cap taken, pick up 7, drop 4, pick up 7, drop 7, pick up and drop 7 after you are in full swing. It caps out at around 3.2 million an hr if everything runs smooth. I don't think the problem is in the amount though. People will telll you there are other ways to make far more NIC. I think the problem is in, people can do it solo. Can't be having that. Solo people in an MMO must suck. It's the law.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

I'm sure it's too late to debate the changes to transportation missions as it is a done deal.  Remind me again why this needed fixing?  I think changing it is a mistake for the sake of perceived imbalance and is based upon emotional arguments of little substance. I have to ask, what is so wrong about having a mode of making NIC quickly?  Where is the hard data that shows real imbalances due to people making quick NIC from transport missions?  I'll bet nobody has hard, objective statistics to definitively define a real problem.

The way the Golden Triangle assignments are now, it allows people like me with limited recreational time to log on, make some quick NIC, and log off.  Furthermore, it is a seriously boring mode of play; I can't do more than two rounds worth, then I have to stop.  Some people will grind such boring stuff until their eyes drop out. So what?  So what if players choose to become filthy rich from crying tears of boredom.  If you don't like that mode of play, you are free to avoid it and choose whatever assignment types tickle your fancy.  Simultaneously, this is automatically balanced because everyone can choose to do make quick cash or not. 

Every game should have some way to make cash quickly, especially in a PvP based game.  Having to grind many hours to cover PvP loses is very difficult for working folks like me.  Not only that, but large time investments in resource grinding is NOT fun.  A method to make cash quickly minimizes the grind and maximizes the more fun elements of the game.  Kernel farming is a great example.  My corp needs thousands of kernels, and we have to grind to get them.  I don't consider this very fun, no more or less fun than transportation missions.  It's simply something that must be done to grow our in-game skills.  If I could grind NIC quickly and buy a bunch of kernels, I'd be happier.  That option is about to be taken away.

Lastly, balancing via nerfing is just a bad design decision and establishes an ugly precedent.  Nerfing is a cheap and easy way to accomplish balance.  In this particular case, the Devs are using a nerfing strategy to balance something that needs no balancing.  Good job.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

havent read the whole topic very long.

all non-dangerous missions around the alpha terminals have been meant to provide a last income source to someone who has lost everything down to the arkhe with syn-crap equip.

it was not meant to have macro-multi-boxers to run them all day long to gain millions of NIC as their primary income.

-> if you have lost everything as a industrial/mining agent, you should be able to make enough NIC to get back into an argano with 3 standard mining lasers, whithout the need to kill anything. Due to the rather low ore prices on market, transporting something from A to B was the best thing to do.

As long as theres still a way to get back into money-making gear in a resonable time (1 day) they can nerf transport missions as much as they want.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Of course you mean they should balance the NIC/hour of transports with Combat missions so that mission runners of all types have an equal earning capactity; for level 1 missions.

After level 1, you start getting into risk/reward/loss issues for all missions, not just combat. Trying to geo scan under a npc spawn will eventually result in losing that bot if you get careless, which is about the same thing with combt missions, or a roaming npc running over you while your on a mining mission.

It would be nice to see a boost to the higher level missions, to encourage that extra risk.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Annihilator wrote:

havent read the whole topic very long.

all non-dangerous missions around the alpha terminals have been meant to provide a last income source to someone who has lost everything down to the arkhe with syn-crap equip.

it was not meant to have macro-multi-boxers to run them all day long to gain millions of NIC as their primary income.

-> if you have lost everything as a industrial/mining agent, you should be able to make enough NIC to get back into an argano with 3 standard mining lasers, whithout the need to kill anything. Due to the rather low ore prices on market, transporting something from A to B was the best thing to do.

As long as theres still a way to get back into money-making gear in a resonable time (1 day) they can nerf transport missions as much as they want.

I do understand that perspective.  I restate that use of the Triangle as an income source is automatically balanced because it is available to all players.  It is erroneous to argue that, because you CHOOSE not to utilize the Triangle, that it is bad for the game.  It is an erroneous argument that because some people are angry about easy profits from the Triangle that it is bad for the game.  It is an erroneous argument that since macroers abuse the Triangle, it must be nerfed, when really the problem is macroing.

All I ask for is objective data that shows the alleged negative effects of running the Triangle.  My primary point is that nobody can provide objective data on the topic; the decision to nerf was based upon the emotions of the issue, not objective data and facts.  My second point is that nerfing based upon emotional arguments is a dangerous precedent for any game.  It's engineering by mob vote accompanied by circular reasoning.  Issues of balance usually are.  The arguments typically go something like : "Hey, those guys are able to kick our *** so they need to be nerfed" or "Hey those guys make more cash than we do, so they need to be nerfed".

Like I said, it is too late to change the planned nerf of the Triangle.  So for the future, my vote is base changes to the game on objective data rather than whim and/or emotions.  If the Dev Team has objective data that shows the Triangle in it's current form is deleterious to the in-game economy, then let's see it, and I'll gladly eat my words.  My bet is that no such objective data set was developed to justify the decision to nerf.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

think any type of NPC-Farming or Missionrunning should be better for NIC Gaining than Transport missions.

The Risk at NPC-Farming or Bounty Hunting is higher, and i would be wish to increase the amount of plasma which is dropping, or the worth of the plasma.

my 2 Cent

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

actually, they are correcting the triangle exactly the oppositte of what i would have liked:

the transport missions can be chained and there are 8!! of them that you can do at the same time with the same target and tha same robot-fit (sequer + lwf + small shield against scratches in paint)

combat missions are maximum 2 in same target area, and you got twice the distance to get accept another one. Parrallel assignment extension for combat mission = waste above lvl3. Also every combat mission needs a slight different fit for highest efficiency (different ammo, different defense, etc.)

so - how will the fix it: Transport missions will work exactly like the anoying combat missions. Go to point A do action B and get back to Terminal to take another mission.

is it just me or should the "parallel assignment" extension be removed from game too?

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Pak wrote:
Mouse Tiger wrote:

Asintec to Tellesis takes a good 15 min, Asintec to ICS is fast

I stand corrected. I just confused Tellesis with ICS.

But Tellesis is not part of the triangle, therefore I'm now wondering why Hugh was talking about Tellesis to begin with.

It was my first trip between islands that I had to use multiple teleports and such ... but after a bit of running aroung the map I realised that the main terminals are just one teleport hop apart ...

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Annihilator wrote:

actually, they are correcting the triangle exactly the oppositte of what i would have liked:

the transport missions can be chained and there are 8!! of them that you can do at the same time with the same target and tha same robot-fit (sequer + lwf + small shield against scratches in paint)

combat missions are maximum 2 in same target area, and you got twice the distance to get accept another one. Parrallel assignment extension for combat mission = waste above lvl3. Also every combat mission needs a slight different fit for highest efficiency (different ammo, different defense, etc.)

so - how will the fix it: Transport missions will work exactly like the anoying combat missions. Go to point A do action B and get back to Terminal to take another mission.

is it just me or should the "parallel assignment" extension be removed from game too?

no ... 2 things need fixing:

1. increase the number of non-transport missions
2. only 1 or 2 missions on a given terminal will have their drop off location on anther island. i.e you have to run to outpost on the same island for 2/3 of the offered missions, the last 1/3 will go to the other islands terminals.

this will effectively reduce the nic/hour for transports since they are no longer that time rewarding and increase the nic/hour or at least parallel assignments usability for non-transports.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Everyone still seems to be arguing HOW to nerf, when I challenge the NEED to nerf at all.  In-game economic imbalance due to the Triangle is not an objectively identified problem.  As far as I can tell, the main arguments are:
1)  "My in-game choices limit my income, therefore Triangle runners need to be nerfed."
2)  "Macroers are abusing the Triangle leading to economic imbalance"
3) " The Triangle is being used in ways that were never intended."

You can certainly make a lot of cash quickly using the current Triangle system.  The result of the planned nerf is loss of the only efficient cash generation mode in the game, thus limiting in-game choice for all players.  There is no objective proof that this is a problem or that a nerf will fix it.

Some list macro abuse of the Triangle as a problem.  If true, the real fix is to stop the macroing.  A Triangle nerf will not fix this because the macroers will simply write for the next best scenario.  By current logic, the Devs will be nerfing forever rather than fixing any root causes.  There is no objective proof that this is a problem or that a nerf will fix it.

Not as intended?  Many players are utilizing a currently legal game mechanic to generate cash.  There is no objective proof that this is a problem or that a nerf will fix it.

Objective data allows the most effective use of precious development time.  Allowing subjectivity to drive design equations is simply poor engineering, potentially squandering resources.  I cannot believe the most optimal results will be achieved with such engineering practices, and I encourage the Dev Team to objectify their decision trees, and publish statements of their findings.  If the Devs show an causal relationship proving the Triangle is the root cause of in-game economic imbalance, then I'll gladly eat my words and STFU.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

There doesn't need to be an 'objective' reason. The stated reason is that it's a poor game mechanic.

If there was a dispenser outside of each main outpost,
and if you drove up to it in a sequar (on as many characters as you own),
and you were allowed to click it once per parrallel assignement, for 25K per click
and it reset everytime you used the main teleporter...

then you would probably agree that it was a bad form of play, even if your conclusions about it's actual effect on the economy are right or wrong.

Transport triangle is in it's essence, just a grinding button pressing game mechanic that the devs are looking to make more 'game like' instead of dispenser like.

It remains to be seen if the NIC/Hour earning potential is changed drastically, we do know however that the mindless repetitious nature of the NIC/Hour will though; so in that respect its just being balanced with other missions that can't be done while watching a movie.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Like Arga said, we don't know yet if the nic per hour is going to be reduced. They're changing how you will run transports is all. No more endless round robin from alpha terminal to alpha terminal. Some are viewing this as a nerf, but it could be that with the change comes higher payouts for the mission so the nic per hour will stay the same.

Reset each other yet?

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Is the Golden Triangle still possible ? I wish to do that but i can accept only identical mission at a time ( yes i have parallel missions extension ) ?!

42 (edited by Xyberviri 2011-08-04 16:44:22)

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Krall wrote:

You PvE'rs have no idea how much I wish I played this game when I could PvP flag and kill you while you were doing a "combat" mission. Go to betas and do some real combat you pansy.

LoL thats called Dishonorable combat, We had the same issue over in Fallen Earth when the *** would ninja flag behind you then just run away going "TROLOLOLOL".

The flag system should be a on/off flag not a push for 5 minutes of pvpisum. Additionally it should require you to dock before it can be set or turned off.


SmokeyIndustries wrote:

Like Arga said, we don't know yet if the nic per hour is going to be reduced. They're changing how you will run transports is all. No more endless round robin from alpha terminal to alpha terminal. Some are viewing this as a nerf, but it could be that with the change comes higher payouts for the mission so the nic per hour will stay the same.

they aren't going to change the payout on anything that would just inject more money into the game when the big mega corps already have billions to throw away.


Shimaire wrote:

Is the Golden Triangle still possible ? I wish to do that but i can accept only identical mission at a time ( yes i have parallel missions extension ) ?!

Make a brand new account and invest in Navigation 7, Parallel mission assignment 6, basic robotics 4 and indy 4 and you have a golden triangle build for a day 1 newb.

Run those level 0 transport missions for about 3-4 hours and you get your rep up enough to start doing them. at hour #5 you should have your first 1.5 million.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Mrs Pickerel wrote:

-Stuff-


I Agree with most of what Mrs Pickerel is saying here, i dont think we need to nerf triangle missions but put them more in balance if your able to do 7 at a time the amount needs t be lowered to bring it inline with the model intended by the devs.

This game needs a minimum Wage that you can see based on the average time to complete and reward for missions based on level. theres no base line right now to say 15minutes of combat is(50k) = to 15 minutes of transport missions(300k).

How ever at the same time the problem with the game is inflation already happens with some items in the game, like Sensor amps whats is up with that.

I think the problem isn't the 1 guy running transport missions, its the guy with 14 accounts running transport missions. that guy is pulling 20 million a hour. also this nerf isn't going to stop it either its just going to make it more viable for 1 person with 14 accounts to still make more money than you. but hey i guess when you have your own raid team thats sorta the world we live in.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

This is very much a matter of reward baceause I still don't view anything as risk. Time consumed yes but I can either do it or I can't. There is no risk. I might have to kite my mission kills but that's about set up.

If they put 1 Kernal on the reward sheet for Level 2 and 3 respective instead of Ammo an Industrial has no use for, people might get off the damn triangle.

Re: The "Triangle" v combat missions

Xyberviri wrote:
Krall wrote:

You PvE'rs have no idea how much I wish I played this game when I could PvP flag and kill you while you were doing a "combat" mission. Go to betas and do some real combat you pansy.

LoL thats called Dishonorable combat, We had the same issue over in Fallen Earth when the *** would ninja flag behind you then just run away going "TROLOLOLOL".

The flag system should be a on/off flag not a push for 5 minutes of pvpisum. Additionally it should require you to dock before it can be set or turned off.


SmokeyIndustries wrote:

Like Arga said, we don't know yet if the nic per hour is going to be reduced. They're changing how you will run transports is all. No more endless round robin from alpha terminal to alpha terminal. Some are viewing this as a nerf, but it could be that with the change comes higher payouts for the mission so the nic per hour will stay the same.

they aren't going to change the payout on anything that would just inject more money into the game when the big mega corps already have billions to throw away.


Shimaire wrote:

Is the Golden Triangle still possible ? I wish to do that but i can accept only identical mission at a time ( yes i have parallel missions extension ) ?!

Make a brand new account and invest in Navigation 7, Parallel mission assignment 6, basic robotics 4 and indy 4 and you have a golden triangle build for a day 1 newb.

Run those level 0 transport missions for about 3-4 hours and you get your rep up enough to start doing them. at hour #5 you should have your first 1.5 million.


What big mega corps with billions? Which ones? Maybe billions in assets, billions in production. What should it matter if they do have billions, they worked for it, same as people who run transports work for it. Average Seth + fitting is around 50m (t4 stuff).
Average time it takes to earn it running 1 account  on the triangle? 30 hours. Average time before this noob account can use a seth + t4 fittings? 2-3 months.

Setting a minimum wage for what you do in the game is not a very good idea. For one, it would be impossibly hard to balance, how do you decide what someone's time is worth to them? No thanks. Each and everything you do to support yourself in this game has trade offs and people that like to do one more then the other.

Can you belive all this butthurt about the triangle is over 1 guy who does it with 10 accounts at one time? Do you people realize should he decide to sell it, epriton mining on beta would far outproduce the amount of nic it would generate for him and his corporation? Or even regular ore on alpha. 10 riveler mk2s would utterly decimate entire spawns of ore. I'm glad he's doing transport missions and not on an island near me mining.