These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Srsly, something has to be done about incursions.

First post First post
Author
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#261 - 2012-01-13 03:25:22 UTC
Killstealing wrote:
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
dont say 0 risk. I have seen total fail cascades in incursions before because of spawn triggers gone wrong.

no that would be because the players were completely ********. DPS in incursions = clicking what is broadcasted by the FC, Logi = locking everyone and just mashing reps, FC = follow flowchart and broadcast ****

This is of course for VG sites only, which are coincidentally both the easiest, quickest (maybe mining with prebought ore but **** ore) and best isk/hr sites.

Make effort and risk equal payment again. VG sites are literally doable by small kids without any prev. experience (I made a 10 yo play logi once, I just told him to press the F buttons when yelling came from the speakers until the yelling stopped) and are risk-free (it takes about 10 maels to alpha a logi, jamming don't work with ECCM mods, good luck getting a gank done when there's usually concord present in system already).

Don't start blabbering about the risk of losing a ship due to a drunk logi because even with the most obnoxious group of incompetent jackasses, incursions are a ******* breeze.


Holy **** you are pretty pissed off. Shocked Just relax ok?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#262 - 2012-01-13 03:30:05 UTC
fhc poster marlona sky, ladies and gentlemen

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#263 - 2012-01-13 03:44:48 UTC
Andski wrote:
fhc poster marlona sky, ladies and gentlemen


I'm flattered you keep following my every word in every post on every forum, but it is kinda creepy. What?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#264 - 2012-01-13 03:46:42 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Andski wrote:
fhc poster marlona sky, ladies and gentlemen


I'm flattered you keep following my every word in every post on every forum, but it is kinda creepy. What?


i just saw a few bad posts and i realized you're bad at posting

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Endeavour Starfleet
#265 - 2012-01-13 04:10:11 UTC
Killstealing wrote:
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
dont say 0 risk. I have seen total fail cascades in incursions before because of spawn triggers gone wrong.

no that would be because the players were completely ********. DPS in incursions = clicking what is broadcasted by the FC, Logi = locking everyone and just mashing reps, FC = follow flowchart and broadcast ****

This is of course for VG sites only, which are coincidentally both the easiest, quickest (maybe mining with prebought ore but **** ore) and best isk/hr sites.

Make effort and risk equal payment again. VG sites are literally doable by small kids without any prev. experience (I made a 10 yo play logi once, I just told him to press the F buttons when yelling came from the speakers until the yelling stopped) and are risk-free (it takes about 10 maels to alpha a logi, jamming don't work with ECCM mods, good luck getting a gank done when there's usually concord present in system already).

Don't start blabbering about the risk of losing a ship due to a drunk logi because even with the most obnoxious group of incompetent jackasses, incursions are a ******* breeze.


Ya I don't think you have ever been in a serious incursion fleet.

And too bad on the cost to gank. Working as intended. A 100+M ship should not fall to a couple of catalysts before concord arrives.

And yes drunk dc logis are a big issue when you have a 2B isk fit on the line. Pretending otherwise does not help your point.
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#266 - 2012-01-13 04:10:13 UTC
Andski wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Andski wrote:
fhc poster marlona sky, ladies and gentlemen


I'm flattered you keep following my every word in every post on every forum, but it is kinda creepy. What?


i just saw a few bad posts and i realized you're bad at posting


It normally just takes one post.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)

Renar D'Vinge
Sweetrock Mining
#267 - 2012-01-13 05:17:13 UTC
Great! So I resub after couple of years to get some incursion action, now CCP decides to nerf it UghBear
Endeavour Starfleet
#268 - 2012-01-13 06:09:58 UTC
Renar D'Vinge wrote:
Great! So I resub after couple of years to get some incursion action, now CCP decides to nerf it UghBear


Don't listen to the fools in here suggesting insane nerfs to incursions. The CSM incursion requests seem rather moderate changes. I support the change for instance to prevent blitzing of vanguard sites by shiny fleets. This will almost certainly not affect nonshiny fleets.

The adding more risk part I am against due to more effect on nonshiny fleets. But that can be debated once CCP announces the changes later.
Irrilian
EVE University
Ivy League
#269 - 2012-01-13 06:16:47 UTC
I’ve been running incursions with E-uni, while not optimal our fleets are surprisingly efficient with Vanguards and can compete with quite expensive bespoke fleets at times. Glancing back through my wallet I seem to make anywhere between 50M and 80M an hour. The key factor is competition, while theoretically you can blitz through Vanguard sites in 5mins before racing on to the next, you’re never going to achieve the earnings some people quote in this thread as hi-sec incursions are typically very busy during peak hours which drastically cuts into the theoretical income.

Personally I feel incomes from group activities should be good in comparison to solo-able income sources, particularly for the long term health of the game: the idea being that people meet others through such content, form friendships and join corporations rather than linger in NPC corps, players with such social bonds are more likely to be retained as subscribers. However Incursions feel very much like Wormholes-light, its content you can dip in and out of at will compared to the logistical overhead of living in a wormhole, thus as long as the base income is below that of Wormholes I don’t really see that much of an issue with it.

Incursions could really do with being more challenging, not in the sense of more dps/resistances/ships, but more varied (really that’s a criticism of all PVE content in Eve which by modern mmorpg standards is rather poor):

  • Beyond the general class i.e. Scout, Vanguard, Assault, Headquarters, you shouldn’t know the actual type of incursion until you land on grid. The only beacon you should see on the overview is “Sansha incursion”. This would cut back on the blitzing of NCO and NMCs.
  • Incursion NPC waves need to be less predictable. As a FC you could pretty much just use a sound board for NCOs and NMCs. The players should need to pay attention and adapt.
  • The scale of payouts for incursions need to be adjusted so that Vanguard’s aren’t optimal isk/hour and even within classes of Incursions things need to be tinkered with e.g. OTAs are typically avoided in comparison to NCOs and NMCs given that they’re more risky yet offer the same payout.

Nerfing hi-sec (incursions) in hopes that it will encourage people to low sec/0.0 is rather optimistic, in the 8 or so years of the game has that strategy ever worked?
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#270 - 2012-01-13 06:36:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tallian Saotome
I don't know if this has already been clarified since my last post, but alot of people need to stop thinking of money as an absolute. Its a commodity, just like minerals, pi or mods. It has no inherent value, tho, only what people place in it. If there is alot of isk per player, that value goes down because you don't value it as much.

This is simple economics, people. We should have all learned this in high school. :/

EDIT: and I doubt anyone has a problem with incursions themselves, just the payout because its devaluing every other form of isk making. The change the payouts to be LP heavy and isk light is the best idea overall.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#271 - 2012-01-13 07:35:52 UTC
mkint wrote:
Gogela wrote:

I still don't see what any of this has to do with adjusting the way incursions work.

Nullbear RMTers want to stamp out any competition before it shows up. CSM, with maybe 1 or 2 exceptions, are nullbear RMTers. CCP Greyscale develops the game in ways that favor the nullbear RMTers and crushes competition. A big collaboration of nullbear RMTers deciding how to develop a game asset that threatens their livelihoods? Take a wild guess as to what direction it will go.

In EVE one thing is sure to never change... to get sov you must have supers. to get supers, you must have sov. Changing that would threaten the RMT machine.


i love your idiotic bleating, keep bringing that bullshit this way

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#272 - 2012-01-13 07:57:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Maybe for you. Not for those flying 2-3 2-3B isk ships.

And division by account matters not. You can plex an account or two in a single day running 4s. The rest of the month is pure profit. And you don't have the risks of a drunk logi or other crap that ends up with your ship a smoldering pile of junk.

What needs to happen is eventually IVs and Vs need to be moved into an incursion like grouping system. Hisec moving into a grouping stance will benefit EVE as a whole because it will reduce botting and teach behaviors that can benefit people going into other areas of the game.

Edit: You mentioned 100M an hour with one account. That and the 150 figure assumes everything is PERFECT and that you are running them again and again and again with no downtime for people to change ships or change members of fleets.


I have faction and deadspace fitted Mach and marauder. On my 4 mission alts I can grind everything everywhere, in the past years I even have done low sec and 0.0 L4s. Yet as big time L4 missioneer I cared for the game I loved more than for my own petty immediate interests (which you evidently don't).

I was one of the 3 guys who got L4s nerfed (too easy, too much ISK, too many minerals at the time => EvE economy was at risk) and seeing how you talk EXACTLY like the past L4 privileged players it means you are defensive and this means you know a nerf is due but want to defend the undefendable.

You are spewing bullcrap to defend your current niche like all the average narrow sighted street guys who see their privileges at risk.
The game economy is at stake and EvE without healthy economy is but an empty sci-fi shell.

Sure, the group :effort: has to be rewarded and pay more than L4s but it should not entice people stopping WH and 0.0 "farming" (because this is what's about) to come hi sec.

Also, even if with 3 accounts was possible to consistently make 100M per hour, it's still 30M per account. Have to refit / reship if it's the case, refill ammo (glass cannon setups use a lot of it), discard the crappy faction / drone / "duo of death" and similar missions cycling them on the other accounts. (Edit: actually NOT using 3 accounts like you say, can net more ISK than that, but that involves multiboxing multi-blitzing, which is not always feasible and some times very hazardous).

3 accounts means buying 3 PLEX not 1.
It means 3 x 500M PLEXes would take 50 hours to be grinded.
At the average CCP published play time (2.5 hours a day per account) it means 20 total days of grinding for the full 2.5 hours.

An hi sec incursion-eer has to grind 1 PLEX and this takes 5 hours or *2* average player playing days.

A time commitment factor of TEN times less than a 2.5h missioneer.

There cannot be anyone so stupid not to see how this is just ********. But this is EvE and like RL, people will defend their niches with teeth and nails, ME ME ME ME! before everyone else in the universe (see how good it did for our world).
Endeavour Starfleet
#273 - 2012-01-13 09:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
Yes people like you have been saying "the EVE economy is at risk OH NOES" for the longest time now when it comes to incursions. But wont show proof except for Plex prices which are not an indicator of anything considering the changes between Incarna and Crucible brought many bittervets back.

Except the economy is doing fine. Bigger issue is hisec people are making isk and folks like you don't like that. Lessens the power of nullsec overlords.
Endeavour Starfleet
#274 - 2012-01-13 09:26:19 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:
I don't know if this has already been clarified since my last post, but alot of people need to stop thinking of money as an absolute. Its a commodity, just like minerals, pi or mods. It has no inherent value, tho, only what people place in it. If there is alot of isk per player, that value goes down because you don't value it as much.

This is simple economics, people. We should have all learned this in high school. :/

EDIT: and I doubt anyone has a problem with incursions themselves, just the payout because its devaluing every other form of isk making. The change the payouts to be LP heavy and isk light is the best idea overall.


No thanks the payouts are fine. Fix the ability of shiny fleets to blitz vanguards and up the value of the higher sites and we are good to go!
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#275 - 2012-01-13 09:28:38 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Tallian Saotome wrote:
I don't know if this has already been clarified since my last post, but alot of people need to stop thinking of money as an absolute. Its a commodity, just like minerals, pi or mods. It has no inherent value, tho, only what people place in it. If there is alot of isk per player, that value goes down because you don't value it as much.

This is simple economics, people. We should have all learned this in high school. :/

EDIT: and I doubt anyone has a problem with incursions themselves, just the payout because its devaluing every other form of isk making. The change the payouts to be LP heavy and isk light is the best idea overall.


No thanks the payouts are fine. Fix the ability of shiny fleets to blitz vanguards and up the value of the higher sites and we are good to go!


So the fix for incursions causing inflation due to to much isk pouring in is to up the payouts?

Makes perfect sense.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Endeavour Starfleet
#276 - 2012-01-13 09:32:05 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Tallian Saotome wrote:
I don't know if this has already been clarified since my last post, but alot of people need to stop thinking of money as an absolute. Its a commodity, just like minerals, pi or mods. It has no inherent value, tho, only what people place in it. If there is alot of isk per player, that value goes down because you don't value it as much.

This is simple economics, people. We should have all learned this in high school. :/

EDIT: and I doubt anyone has a problem with incursions themselves, just the payout because its devaluing every other form of isk making. The change the payouts to be LP heavy and isk light is the best idea overall.


No thanks the payouts are fine. Fix the ability of shiny fleets to blitz vanguards and up the value of the higher sites and we are good to go!


So the fix for incursions causing inflation due to to much isk pouring in is to up the payouts?

Makes perfect sense.


There is no evidence of this massive incursion inflation. Otherwise the CSM would be tripping over themselves to get it nerfed.

The payouts for the higher sites is to get the shiny fleets to go to them instead of winning contests in vanguards meant for the less shiny fleets. It will allow the less shiny fleets a chance to run incursions during busy times.
Widemouth Deepthroat
Pink Sockers
#277 - 2012-01-13 09:33:57 UTC
Andski wrote:
if you can't understand the core of the problem, 150M/hr in high-sec when you can't even make that running -1.0 anoms with infinitely more risk, you are dumb


it is fair to make that isk because we fly expensive ship with strangers, the real risk of being suicide ganked, the npcs are strong with superier AIS and we have to compete with other players in for isk (incursion pve really is PvEvP!!)..
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
#278 - 2012-01-13 10:18:36 UTC
Widemouth Deepthroat wrote:
Andski wrote:
if you can't understand the core of the problem, 150M/hr in high-sec when you can't even make that running -1.0 anoms with infinitely more risk, you are dumb


it is fair to make that isk because we fly expensive ship with strangers, the real risk of being suicide ganked, the npcs are strong with superier AIS and we have to compete with other players in for isk (incursion pve really is PvEvP!!)..


If incursions were actually dangerous, people wouldn't fly expensive ships in them.

Incursion runners think incursions are dangerous because they have never encountered actual danger before. What they actually experience is a small fraction of the danger of normal life in 0.0 or lowsec, except that when they get targeted by awoxers they lose pve ships instead of supercapitals.

Suck it up.
Raven Ether
Doomheim
#279 - 2012-01-13 11:22:26 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're in the process of scheduling some developer time to review the Incursion content, and make adjustments as needed. We've got a stack of feedback from the CSM, and we'll hopefully be blogging about it in the near future.

Thanks,
-Greyscale


<3 Nerf them.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#280 - 2012-01-13 11:39:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Yes people like you have been saying "the EVE economy is at risk OH NOES" for the longest time now when it comes to incursions. But wont show proof except for Plex prices which are not an indicator of anything considering the changes between Incarna and Crucible brought many bittervets back.

Except the economy is doing fine. Bigger issue is hisec people are making isk and folks like you don't like that. Lessens the power of nullsec overlords.


CCP stopped publishing their economics statistics PDF exactly because people with a clue were pointing out what was wrong and this often collided with their priorities.

Also, you don't plot long term trends about high liquidity commodities like PLEX basing on "bittervets" nor "Hulkageddon" nor "Fanfest tickets" nor "incursions".

There's a global balance between money and assets and even between current gamer purchasing possibilities vs mudflation and it's slowly drifting towards depreciating money. Assets are not increasing their material requirements or anything.
Incursions are certainly not the one cause but it's one.


Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Bigger issue is hisec people are making isk and folks like you don't like that. Lessens the power of nullsec overlords.


As I posted yesterday, those who don't want to be little grinding ants for their 0.0 overlords have just to man up and find another corporation. Unlike RL, EvE is full of members starved corps who welcome anyone who is not just a little insignificant pawn.

Also, hisec people have to make money but to avoid progression loops they have NOT to entice WH or 0.0 players to "return back to hi sec".

It was BAD when hi sec L4 / L5 were so good to make every 0.0 guy have an hi sec alt. It's actually the reason why CCP introduced all those 0.0 features to entice 0.0 players to "live there", not just to log in their main at corp - op time.

If this happens again, if the WH and 0.0 features stop working because something else is so much better, then that something has to be adjusted till the WH and 0.0 players can measure it's more convenient to stay where they are.



Widemouth Deepthroat wrote:

it is fair to make that isk because we fly expensive ship with strangers, the real risk of being suicide ganked, the npcs are strong with superier AIS and we have to compete with other players in for isk (incursion pve really is PvEvP!!)..


This is not risk. It's about the same order of magnitude of risk you get at disconnecting / getting suicide ganked / scrammed while over-aggroing etc. in a L4.

You WILL prove it's risky when - like in low sec and 0.0 - most have to fly in T2 fittings because the risk is high enough to deter using faction and deadspace fittings.

Until you can fly incursions in faction / deadspace, then it's not risky enough to grant more income than other game situations where you can't fly faction / deadspace.