These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Incursions : Revisiting Assaults .
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#1 - 2014-02-09 21:10:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Kodavor
Would it be to hard of a task to remove restrictions from the NCN's ( Nation Consolidation Networks ) and allow any ship types in both pockets ? You would do a GREAT favor to all the incursions pilots and make the Assault sites very popular .

Best regards
Kodavor .

P.S. A Yes / No / Maybe from the higher ups would be appreciated .
lIjii
Emo-RAGE-quit
#2 - 2014-02-09 21:50:31 UTC
/me supports this idea \o/
James Tzashi
Sturmgrenadier Inc
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2014-02-09 21:51:19 UTC
Yeah NCN seem to be the only thing holding back most serious incursion runners from doing them. Allowing Battleships into both sides would make Assaults much more enjoyable.
PiDG30N
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-02-09 21:54:33 UTC
OMG yes this! For way too long now NCNs have been the sole reason nobody does assaults. If they weren't so restricting and didn't require a battlecruiser that my orca really doesn't have the room for, i (and many others i'm sure) would actually consider assaults to be viable and an excellent alternative to sitting on a VG waitlist for hours.
Dante Davino
Casual Filth
#5 - 2014-02-09 22:06:45 UTC
Please do it, assaults wouldn't be a pain to do.
Mempipe
#6 - 2014-02-09 22:10:22 UTC
I have to agree with the top post.
As the incursions become more and more popular the assaults are the least used, a correction in the restrictions to them can only create more options for all incursion community's.
Serious consideration should be made on this point.
Electrified Circuits
Predator Ewoks
#7 - 2014-02-09 22:16:50 UTC
+1 Bear
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#8 - 2014-02-09 22:38:51 UTC
+1

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Kranyoldlady
Women's cave
#9 - 2014-02-09 22:39:59 UTC
+1
Dick53
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2014-02-09 22:51:27 UTC
+1
Andrej Tierce
Tierce Inc.
#11 - 2014-02-09 22:54:46 UTC
Voicing my support.
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#12 - 2014-02-09 22:59:50 UTC
yes.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2014-02-09 23:05:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jill Antaris
It would be probably more successful to just remove 1 pocked(or reduce the spawns on both sites a bit) and cut the amount of sniper targets in the last pocket in halve. I have spend quite a few hours in NCNs the last week again, and a good cruiser side team(3 Tier 3 BCs, 1 Loki, all more or less maxed out and fully gank fitted) can beat the BS most of the time and if you lack good snipers, you will always wait on the snipers to finish the last pocket, since all the ships that doing the cruiser pockets will be cqc and gank fitted, giving you a lot more dps on the close range stuff in the last pocket. On the other hand, to many sniper setups on the BS pockets slow you down to much, you will be a lot slower than the cruisers. From the DPS pov the tier 3 BCs deliver nearly as much punch as a BS, the only drawback is that you need pilots that can fly both and bring both to adjust your fleet for NCNs.

Edit: The major problem of NCNs is, different to NCOs, that the specific site can't be done by a specific fleet faster than the others, so nobody does them and you need to change the fleet you use to run the others, once you have to do NCNs(and even with a optimal setup -> 3 scimis, 1 loki, 3 tier 3 BCs, 3 Vindis, rest sniper BS it is still slower than the other sites).
Sheeana Harb
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2014-02-09 23:06:09 UTC
Making content more pleasurable is rarely a bad thing, I support this suggestion.
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#15 - 2014-02-09 23:07:57 UTC
Jill Antaris wrote:
It would be probably more successful to just remove 1 pocked(or reduce the spawns on both sites a bit) and cut the amount of sniper targets in the last pocket in halve. I have spend quite a few hours in NCNs the last week again, and a good cruiser side team(3 Tier 3 BCs, 1 Loki, all more or less maxed out and fully gank fitted) can beat the BS most of the time and if you lack good snipers, you will always wait on the snipers to finish the last pocket, since all the ships that doing the cruiser pockets will be cqc and gank fitted, giving you a lot more dps on the close range stuff in the last pocket. On the other hand, to many sniper setups on the BS pockets slow you down to much, you will be a lot slower than the cruisers. From the DPS pov the tier 3 BCs deliver nearly as much punch as a BS, the only drawback is that you need pilots that can fly both and bring both to adjust your fleet for NCNs.




That would require greater game mechanic changes than to simply lift ship restrictions on a gate . In this case the restriction lift would solve the issue .
Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2014-02-09 23:34:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jill Antaris
Kodavor wrote:
Jill Antaris wrote:
It would be probably more successful to just remove 1 pocked(or reduce the spawns on both sites a bit) and cut the amount of sniper targets in the last pocket in halve. I have spend quite a few hours in NCNs the last week again, and a good cruiser side team(3 Tier 3 BCs, 1 Loki, all more or less maxed out and fully gank fitted) can beat the BS most of the time and if you lack good snipers, you will always wait on the snipers to finish the last pocket, since all the ships that doing the cruiser pockets will be cqc and gank fitted, giving you a lot more dps on the close range stuff in the last pocket. On the other hand, to many sniper setups on the BS pockets slow you down to much, you will be a lot slower than the cruisers. From the DPS pov the tier 3 BCs deliver nearly as much punch as a BS, the only drawback is that you need pilots that can fly both and bring both to adjust your fleet for NCNs.




That would require greater game mechanic changes than to simply lift ship restrictions on a gate . In this case the restriction lift would solve the issue .


While this is true that it would be easier to implement, it wouldn't change much, you only save yourself the time to reship. In the end however you would still need 3-4 DPS close range hulls for the cruiser pockets and you would still have the issue that to much sniper ships slow you down in the first 3 pockets while not bringing enough slow you down in the last one. However making it attractive for people that bring the right setup, by doing the site faster than the others, would create a similar situation like with NCO focused fleets vs NMC/OTA focused fleets in VGs.This would fix the main problem that it is the slowest site for any kind of fleet, no matter how you set up your fleet(by around 20-40% slower from my experience, if you use a good setup).
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#17 - 2014-02-10 08:14:06 UTC
Jill Antaris wrote:
Kodavor wrote:
Jill Antaris wrote:
It would be probably more successful to just remove 1 pocked(or reduce the spawns on both sites a bit) and cut the amount of sniper targets in the last pocket in halve. I have spend quite a few hours in NCNs the last week again, and a good cruiser side team(3 Tier 3 BCs, 1 Loki, all more or less maxed out and fully gank fitted) can beat the BS most of the time and if you lack good snipers, you will always wait on the snipers to finish the last pocket, since all the ships that doing the cruiser pockets will be cqc and gank fitted, giving you a lot more dps on the close range stuff in the last pocket. On the other hand, to many sniper setups on the BS pockets slow you down to much, you will be a lot slower than the cruisers. From the DPS pov the tier 3 BCs deliver nearly as much punch as a BS, the only drawback is that you need pilots that can fly both and bring both to adjust your fleet for NCNs.




That would require greater game mechanic changes than to simply lift ship restrictions on a gate . In this case the restriction lift would solve the issue .


While this is true that it would be easier to implement, it wouldn't change much, you only save yourself the time to reship. In the end however you would still need 3-4 DPS close range hulls for the cruiser pockets and you would still have the issue that to much sniper ships slow you down in the first 3 pockets while not bringing enough slow you down in the last one. However making it attractive for people that bring the right setup, by doing the site faster than the others, would create a similar situation like with NCO focused fleets vs NMC/OTA focused fleets in VGs.This would fix the main problem that it is the slowest site for any kind of fleet, no matter how you set up your fleet(by around 20-40% slower from my experience, if you use a good setup).



That would require greater game mechanic changes than to simply lift ship restrictions on a gate . In this case the restriction lift would solve the issue . For example : If there were ship restrictions on NCO's then nobody would do them . But there are no restrictions so pilots ( if required ) simply refit guns / webs on a Orca / Mobile depot / Station and continue .

Therefore : . In this case the restriction lift on the acceleration gates would solve the issue .
Diana Kim
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#18 - 2014-02-10 08:24:05 UTC
+1

Honored are the dead, for their legacy guides us.

In memory of Tibus Heth, Caldari State Executor YC110-115, Hero and Patriot.
Rob Cobb
Probe Patrol
#19 - 2014-02-10 08:31:17 UTC
+1
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2014-02-10 11:37:15 UTC
shouldn't this be found on F&I ?

anyway +1.
123Next pageLast page