These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Incursions as PvP:

First post
Author
Black Pedro
Mine.
#121 - 2015-08-21 19:19:16 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
That's why your position seems so paradoxical. You state they wouldn't work on it without the intention to use it more widely, but agree with the idea that they would want it to go unused? I'm not sure how to reconsile those 2 viewpoints. The only thing I can think of is that you believe seeing ignored incursions around the HS map is a better use of effort in CCPs eyes than a single event with greater loss potential.
Many less people will be doing incursions. Many of the current grinders will move to lowsec to FW, to null to rat, to L4 missions in highsec and possibly to WHs to farm. There is no paradox here. CCP wants people to lose ships to stimulate the economy, form stronger social ties to encourage retention, and to serve as targets to provide content and migrating people away from farmable incursions serves these purposes. I think you are wrong - people will still run Drifter incursions. There is very much a small core of players who will not tolerate any PvP so they will run incursions if they are at all fun and it pays more than L4s after accounting for ship loss, but most of the others will migrate away. So perhaps 10-20% of the current numbers will stay on and find ways to deal with guaranteed ship loss, and the rest will move on to other things, many of them back to nullsec. Even the ones that stay with incursions will start losing ships and be forced to cooperate more so it is a win-win for CCP.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Regarding the idea of groups becoming more engaged, why would they? How does less profit and more logistical headaches lead to a more involved community? We saw those communities collapse back when their income got a slight nerf, but want them to band together tighter with an even worse nerf? The pot will have to be greatly sweetened with this activity to make this worthwhile enough to counteract the normal chase to the lowest risk+effort:reward activity.
They will have no choice or they will have to do something else. It is that simple. CCP is drawing a line in the sand and doubling-down on player driven content. By providing new PvE content they can say they are offering something new to players, and if they turn up their nose at that as "too hard" or "not farmable enough", the greater Eve community is going to have little sympathy for incursion runners.

There is other content in Eve, and there are other games. CCP doesn't seem to have a problem with letting accounts go in pursuit of a more vibrant game (see: ISBoxer ban) these days.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I just don't see it working for any of the goals you state save ending HS incursion running. Beyond that, tighter groups and moving people back to null seem like the same pipe dreams they always are when you look beyond that single mechanic.
It makes perfect sense to me, and apparently to CCP. Incursions are nice to appeal to pure PvE players, but when it starts to impact on the core PvP game you are selling, changes have to be made. I don't think they care anymore if 75% of incursion runners go away, as they figure many or most of them will just move to something else in Eve, and they are starting to, I won't say panic, but have serious concerns about restarting the conflict in nullsec and the greater game which is their main focus according to Seagull.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#122 - 2015-08-21 20:31:22 UTC
I think you're incorrect about the remaining groups doing drifter incursions being significant or making groups tighter. Activities that require cohesion and pooled resources work for groups that are already close while creating vulnerabilities that destroy those that are not. The mechanic hardly seems to build groups as much as confirm those that are already there, and that's still if that collective effort can't be put to better use elsewhere.

This is why I predict the death of the public incursion group, and with it a reduction in social ties and a harder in to drifter incursion groups. Unless the ability arises to perfectly control ship loss in place of avoidance the cost of operating will be greatly imbalanced between members and so will the reward. That's not a sustainable model for an activity that isn't fully moderated somehow. It still also requires a number of people to do their part and offer up their ships when the time comes for a DD.

I don't see that working outside of such controls. If the don't exist what keeps the same player from being DDd several sites in a row? How much does that player up front in the hopes that some time in the future the isk is returned? Does the group moderate that? If so, which will very much likely be the case, how do you ensure full compliance from the group? Simple, a closed group. Not a relationship building and socially open group adding members and drawing them in, but a group that must significantly vet their applicants because a bad apple is now capable of ruining the balance and income of the group.

I say this as a PvE player who looks forward to the experience as a short term event, but a structured I don't see the open for a solo player to have an in with the social structures I see this demanding. That's what a number of incursion runners are, unaffiliateds with easy ins. And the current groups depend largely on those players. Without them they can't maintain their fleets with their few core members either. As such, if this comes to pass and even if your numbers are correct that is effectively death for incursions.

10% - 20% of the members currently running is less than a single HQ fleet during the times I run per incursion. So enough total members for one HQ fleet and a decent wait list if the same numbers are present across 3 HS incursions and compress to one. And I feel that's somewhat optimistic at times. Peak times are another story of course.

@Markus Reese

Drifter incursions shouldn't be confused with the issues surrounding current incursions. At current incursion payouts the loss drops the income way below most other combat PvE activities that are worth anything. Regular incursions could be solved with a income balance and a shift of a few other HS PvE activities to make room. Not so with these as beyond the income potential:

- the logistics of frequent ship replacement getting in the way of being able to run them non-stop,
- the lopsided cost to operate created by those same losses across members creating even significant loss potential on an individual basis,
- the more advanced accounting structure that will be needed on a player org basis to level this difference and
- the likelyhood of moving from the fly what you want attitudes of some communities to rigid cost effective min/max doctrines aimed at maximizing what can be gained after all of the above

all just further complicate any attempt at equivalency.

I don't think there's going to be an agreement between myself and the 2 of you regarding whether the Drifter incursions should replace the Sansha ones in any capacity, HS or no. Where you see social ties I see closed small groups that were once open and large. Where you see a small but dedicated group I see levels of activity which won't be sustainable when I play. Where you see a solution to highsec moneymaking I can't help but think of the of the threads that came before about lvl 4's and the market traders laughing at these threads as much as those.

I don't think we'll ever reconcile on the idea that your theory would be a good direction for any of the causes you state it will serve, save killing incursion running population, but I don't believe that the secondary results you predict are realistic in any appreciable scale vs simply properly balancing the current mechanic's income potential.

I'm not even willing to speculate on the effect this will have on subs. That's another conversation beyond this content itself.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#123 - 2015-08-21 20:54:39 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I think you're incorrect about the remaining groups doing drifter incursions being significant or making groups tighter. Activities that require cohesion and pooled resources work for groups that are already close while creating vulnerabilities that destroy those that are not. The mechanic hardly seems to build groups as much as confirm those that are already there, and that's still if that collective effort can't be put to better use elsewhere.

This is why I predict the death of the public incursion group, and with it a reduction in social ties and a harder in to drifter incursion groups. Unless the ability arises to perfectly control ship loss in place of avoidance the cost of operating will be greatly imbalanced between members and so will the reward. That's not a sustainable model for an activity that isn't fully moderated somehow. It still also requires a number of people to do their part and offer up their ships when the time comes for a DD.

I too agree with the death, or at least the several curtailment, of the public incursion group. That appears intentional though. But I don't see why the elite, private groups won't continue. It will be easy enough to provide a form of insurance for the group if it is one cohesive unit. FC's may have to build up some trust, but I am sure players will come up with something to deal with sharing the risk of ship loss among the group, even with taking "strangers" into their operation with the appropriate assurances. It will incentivize incursion runners to form persistent groups and trust one another which can only be a good thing and honestly, probably is closer to the original intention of incursions than the public PUG fleets that are common today.

But it will not be as easy as it is now, I agree. Only players who truly enjoy that content, or refuse to expose themselves to PvP and have no other choice will be running incursions in the future.

But really, who knows. This is mostly speculation. Let's wait until CCP announces their plans for the future of highsec incursions before we bury them.
Kaelynne Rose
WTB Somalians
#124 - 2015-11-19 14:14:02 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Whats the idea behind super bling ships being immunized against PvP by HS sector rules, when all those rules do is impair everyone else's PvE in that system?

Also whats the idea in 10+ ships with uberbling fittings farming HS most lucrative activity with no PvP risk?

Should Incursion fleets fight each other for access to profit, as does everyone else in EVE?

Discuss.

Wonderful idea
Low Risk=Low Reward
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#125 - 2015-11-19 23:58:01 UTC
Quote:

Forum rules

13. Spamming is prohibited.

Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or nonsensical post that has no substance and is often designed to annoy other forum users. This can include the words “first”, “go back to insert other game name” and other such posts that contribute no value to forum discussion. Spamming also includes the posting of ASCII art within a forum post, or the practice of “thread necromancy” which involved bumping of old threads for no justifiable reason.


Thread necromancy is my least favorite game.

Locked.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department