These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Possibly too far with balancing Incursions?

First post First post
Author
RabbidFerret
Target Practice Inc.
#341 - 2012-05-01 01:13:04 UTC
Galerak wrote:


Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!


That's actually an amazing idea. +1
DJ N00B
National Order Of Bastards Yearning
#342 - 2012-05-01 01:34:51 UTC
RabbidFerret wrote:
Galerak wrote:


Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!


That's actually an amazing idea. +1


Not be self serving but yeah I like the idea as well.


And for crying out loud can we get logi's some love and give them the same standings benefits the dps members get.
Galerak
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#343 - 2012-05-01 01:51:37 UTC
DJ N00B wrote:
RabbidFerret wrote:
Galerak wrote:


Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!


That's actually an amazing idea. +1


Not be self serving but yeah I like the idea as well.


And for crying out loud can we get logi's some love and give them the same standings benefits the dps members get.


DJ You and the other FCs deserve it. Personally I have no desire to FC but I appreciate and respect all the FC's that are willing to put the work, and patience into it and it only seems fitting that the longer a fleet runs the more the FC should be rewarded for the effort. And I dont think this should just apply to Incursions but any pve fleet.

As for the Logistics pilots... I agree as they are a crucial part of the fleets they should get the same rewards even something minor like standings.

But back on topic. I think removing either the Mara's or the Niarja's from the OTA's could bring them back in balance from a dificulty/time perspective. I'm not really sure what might need to be changed for the NCO/NMC's. We seemed to be doing relatively good against those.
DJ N00B
National Order Of Bastards Yearning
#344 - 2012-05-01 03:26:26 UTC
Thank you for that Galerak

I do agree that the biggest issue on the OTA's is the Mara. When you combine the range, velocities, its mwd, and the tiny sig radius, it quite a challenge to kill. I don't mind the challenge per se, but when it's a challenge even for a nice shiny fleet it really messes things up for the pug fleets.

As far as the other sites, I haven't quite decided what changes, if any, would be good for them. I'll probably at some point in the near future put together a list of recommendations for each of the sites. There are a lot of ideas floating around right now.
RabbidFerret
Target Practice Inc.
#345 - 2012-05-01 05:00:23 UTC
Galerak wrote:


But back on topic. I think removing either the Mara's or the Niarja's from the OTA's could bring them back in balance from a dificulty/time perspective. I'm not really sure what might need to be changed for the NCO/NMC's. We seemed to be doing relatively good against those.


Possibly moving the hacking arrays to within 70k-ish of the fleet warp in. Currently, the hacker is limited by the speed of the fleet if he wants to stay in rep range. Yes you can move logis between the arrays and the fleet but that's suddenly neglecting all of those remote reps and transfers your BSes are carrying. This is being discussed here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=102984&find=unread (although not constructively).

I can understand the desire to randomize spawns a little bit and the need to kill the whole spawn was an effect of random spawns (otherwise you could end up with completely random triggers). Spawns, and probably unit types, need to be tweaked to deliver the same amount of DPS without adding an additional 5-7 targets to kill. So up the number of battleships or tweak cruiser dps. Take Mara's off the trigger requirements..

Another option is to remove the "kill the wave" mechanic and randomize the supporting units. So for example in an NMC, keep the Tama's waves a constant (and still the trigger), but randomize Niarja, Mara and Auga spawns. Keep us on our toes a little bit. Ignoring 4 or 5 Maras might become a tactical mistake.
Gabriel Luminati
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#346 - 2012-05-01 06:40:53 UTC
DJ N00B wrote:
RabbidFerret wrote:
Galerak wrote:


Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!


That's actually an amazing idea. +1


Not be self serving but yeah I like the idea as well.


And for crying out loud can we get logi's some love and give them the same standings benefits the dps members get.



This is the main reason why i gave up FCing VGs and Assaults. You just dont get anything extra for stepping up and showing initiative and organisational skills. Also, i believe its the FCs that help fleet members to have a fun, relaxing and enjoyable environment. Some may be hard up but generally they encourage people to interact and laugh over shared matters.
FCs are like Morpheus = "Without him, we are lost" (Matrix quote).
Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
#347 - 2012-05-01 11:31:31 UTC
Annunaki soldier wrote:
why people dont get it that incursions and their money involved really were adding more to pvp , also to industrialist . The money from there where spent to buying pvp ships to break all the time , that you buy t2 things , that people produce those. Now with limiting the money involved we all lose. PvPer's that had the incursion for their supply of ships will just buy less ships , cheaper ships also. That also include less money to people that produce that.

As for mining instead of limiting the other money why not fix the mining money involved and raise their profit in order to actually be profitable being a miner ( i am always talking about high sec things )

Those that say people will go low sec now they are mistaken. People that didnt go low sec , will stay high sec even if they nerf things to the bottom. If you deny their option to substain their accounts and limit the fun THEY want for them then they will just leave for another game.



That is a logic facility. Incursions generate nothing of real value, as isk have not much value in itself and concord LP are not much used.
Miners generate ore, ore which can be used to refine to minerals, which can be used to build ships. At each of those steps value is generated. Buying those ships does not generate anything. Blowing those ships up generate demand, which is good because without demand the production chain would fail.
All activities that just generate isk are mainly inflations factors, as isk has limited use besides trade. Only npc items can be "created" via isk > LP Store Items and Skillbooks mainly.
Ask yourself. If everyone would just farm sanctums, incursions and missions, would there still be any ships left to buy with all the isk generated?

Still, incursions should be balanced in relation to other isk generating activities, like missions and anomalies, and as well at least partly balanced compared to production related activities like mining, t3 production, etc

Currently incursions seem to be unbalanced at least to missions, which could be fixed with either increasing incursion isk or decreasing mission isk. I would prefer the later, a general bounty nerf sounds good to me.

Remove insurance.

Druid Cilnok
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#348 - 2012-05-01 16:23:40 UTC
I am a 0.0 bear like many incursion runners. I only ever ran incursions a couple days a month to pay for the months PVP losses which are inevitable and for a plex for my PVE alt.

Less time doing PVE means more time doing something more fun, PVP which is why i still enjoy Eve. I have never at all enjoyed grinding for isk, because its work, and this is supposed to be a game, not work. So incursions were a welcome form of PVE because like PVP i got to interact and work in a fleet, but like mission running it was predictable so i felt comfortable enough risking my expensive BS with relative strangers.

In no other place am i likely to fly and trust people like i have in incursions. I just dont understand what was broken. ANYONE could have got into an incursion fleet, most people have alts, and its not too difficult to train into a required ship type, be that a legion or machariel or basi or guardian.

So what if carebears were making tens of billions of isk and never going to 0.0. who cares? they get ganked sooner or later and we all laugh at their shiny KMs.

The likely result i can see from this, is less people being in 0.0 cos they need to spend more time grinding, as if 0.0 wasnt empty enough :o

xVx dreadnaught
Space Telentics Systems Inc
#349 - 2012-05-01 21:14:32 UTC
Apolyon I wrote:
Vizvig wrote:

Most of people in WH is isk farmers or carebears.
Most carebear in WH is one man (or 2) with large pos and 3-4 alts on dreadnought's.

Most of them pays game by PLEX.

aren't incursion exactly the same???

anyway, if you say as if wh that easy, why are you still in kspace??


Well, not everyone that does incursions lives in K-space all the time. As I've said over and over, my alliance live in wormholes. We don't quite have your alliances infrastructure to make anywhere near as much profit from W-Space yet.

I substitute my income with incursions, I don't sit in a VG blitz fleet for hours at a time grinding. I do Assault and Headquarter, because I feel they are more challenging and enjoyable in general. I just wish there was more reward for our effort.

And no, we aren't all multi-boxing, most if not all fleet commanders I know have a strict policy against people duel boxing. (with exception of out of grid boosters for fleet bonuses)

W-Space isn't that dangerous if you prepare and are careful... we had an incident the other night where a K162 opened up into a C5. The people inside came in and chased down our Sleeper site running fleet. We managed to evade the large fleet they had with no loses. Keeping scouts on WH's and checking D-scan regularly isn't hard to do. If we had enough people online we would have fought them... but our numbers were about 1/3 theirs.
xVx dreadnaught
Space Telentics Systems Inc
#350 - 2012-05-01 21:33:29 UTC
DJ N00B wrote:
RabbidFerret wrote:
Galerak wrote:


Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!


That's actually an amazing idea. +1


Not be self serving but yeah I like the idea as well.


And for crying out loud can we get logi's some love and give them the same standings benefits the dps members get.



It is coming... Or at least hopefully.

It was mentioned that Logistics and other Beneficial effects are likely to be showing up on KM's for contributions. If this is true, then some of this mechanic would be able to provide the server with a listing of who was assisting in the killing of people and NPC's. If I'm right it would mean that logi pilots would be able to gain Sec-status as well.

For now, you could just pack DPS drones and assign them to the Drone ball... Those little shots may not be a massive impact on the fleet but will at least be a bonus for your logi pilots.
Apolyon I
Shadow of ISW
#351 - 2012-05-01 21:47:12 UTC
xVx dreadnaught wrote:
Apolyon I wrote:
Vizvig wrote:

Most of people in WH is isk farmers or carebears.
Most carebear in WH is one man (or 2) with large pos and 3-4 alts on dreadnought's.

Most of them pays game by PLEX.

aren't incursion exactly the same???

anyway, if you say as if wh that easy, why are you still in kspace??


Well, not everyone that does incursions lives in K-space all the time. As I've said over and over, my alliance live in wormholes. We don't quite have your alliances infrastructure to make anywhere near as much profit from W-Space yet.

I substitute my income with incursions, I don't sit in a VG blitz fleet for hours at a time grinding. I do Assault and Headquarter, because I feel they are more challenging and enjoyable in general. I just wish there was more reward for our effort.

And no, we aren't all multi-boxing, most if not all fleet commanders I know have a strict policy against people duel boxing. (with exception of out of grid boosters for fleet bonuses)

W-Space isn't that dangerous if you prepare and are careful... we had an incident the other night where a K162 opened up into a C5. The people inside came in and chased down our Sleeper site running fleet. We managed to evade the large fleet they had with no loses. Keeping scouts on WH's and checking D-scan regularly isn't hard to do. If we had enough people online we would have fought them... but our numbers were about 1/3 theirs.

I dont know what kind of sleeper running fleet you have, but probably a few drake

anyway, if you can do that in wspace, it also means incursion is even safer since there's no bubble in HS
xVx dreadnaught
Space Telentics Systems Inc
#352 - 2012-05-01 22:28:32 UTC  |  Edited by: xVx dreadnaught
Apolyon I wrote:
I dont know what kind of sleeper running fleet you have, but probably a few drake

anyway, if you can do that in wspace, it also means incursion is even safer since there's no bubble in HS


LOL... well our Sleeper fleet at the time was 5 tengu and a scimitar.

Their fleet was a phobos, devotor, 4 tengu, proteus, 2 loki, 2 legion, armageddon, 2 tornado... And a few more, but those are the ones I remembered off the top of my head.

I know it's not as super awesome cool as your multiple capital farming set up... But we don't want to dedicate those levels of resources that deep into W-space yet. Maybe we will upgrade later.

We had to log off the Noctis and I probed it a way out the next morning, since it wasn't actually our WH we were farming.

All that is just BTW... I can say however I've never lost a ship while running Sleeper sites. And I've seen a lot more ships lost in incursion fleets. We lost a Kronos in a fleet last night in a HQ site, there was just so much alpha at the start he pretty much instapopped. So I'd say that HQ incursions should more per hour than Vanguards. Because there are losses and there should be some level of compensation to help replace the ships.
RabbidFerret
Target Practice Inc.
#353 - 2012-05-03 04:04:53 UTC
Still patiently awaiting a dev response that properly addresses our concerns.
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#354 - 2012-05-03 10:28:13 UTC
plexlon wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
We did dev blog about it, put it in patch notes and tell all the players the changes were on SISI, then we monitored the feedback and made changes again according to the feedback received from the Incursion community :) Bettik and I will continue to monitor the feedback and stats



Hopefully that doesn't mean "We've decided to ignore this entirely. If subscriptions are not dramatically down by September we will assume you have adjusted and do other stuff now. We really have no intenion of either admitting a really dumb move or fixing it. Admissions are embarassing and fixes are work. kthnxbye."

On a related note I've heard that the changes on SiSi wer Not the same as the changes on Tranquility. If so saying the community was notified and "we monitored the test server" is a bit like a plumber turning on your ktichen sink, asking you if that looks good, then blowing up your toilet. Not a sevice I'd recommend.


The changes that went on SISI are the exact same changes that we then ported to TQ... That is just a fact :)

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle

CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#355 - 2012-05-03 10:52:16 UTC
Just an update, I am reading through all this feedback and we will be making a more detailed post next week about our own findings. I have also had some really valuable feedback, both while the changes were on SISI and now they are on TQ, from the owner and co-owner of BTL pub and other long-term Incursion runners. I have even run Incursions on SISI with them to see how they felt about the changes live.

I don't have anything concrete to tell you right now, but I just wanted to make an update post to let you all know I am still reading this and we do care!

I fully understand that a lot of you are angry but if we could all try and aim for constructive feedback from now on, it will help quicken this process a lot.
''I HATE IT ALL!! YOU SUCK'' <-- an example of a post that isn't going to help.

To dispel any myths - The changes on SISI and TQ were exactly the same, this isn't even up for debate as it's just a fact and it's just how our development process works.

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle

Galerak
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#356 - 2012-05-03 11:38:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Galerak
CCP Affinity wrote:
Just an update, I am reading through all this feedback and we will be making a more detailed post next week about our own findings. I have also had some really valuable feedback, both while the changes were on SISI and now they are on TQ, from the owner and co-owner of BTL pub and other long-term Incursion runners. I have even run Incursions on SISI with them to see how they felt about the changes live.

I don't have anything concrete to tell you right now, but I just wanted to make an update post to let you all know I am still reading this and we do care!

I fully understand that a lot of you are angry but if we could all try and aim for constructive feedback from now on, it will help quicken this process a lot.
''I HATE IT ALL!! YOU SUCK'' <-- an example of a post that isn't going to help.

To dispel any myths - The changes on SISI and TQ were exactly the same, this isn't even up for debate as it's just a fact and it's just how our development process works.


The update is appreciated, Affinity. Sometimes it's hard to tell if any of the constructive suggestions are even being read. I mean between people arguing about WH vs Incursions vs mission and all the "This SUCKS!" posts, finding them can be a chore. As for constructive criticism, it might help if we knew what CCP's goals / guidelines for what Incursions (or vanguards) should be are. Right now everyone is kinda shooting in the dark with what the individual feels would be better but without any context from CCP there's no way of knowing if our suggestions/ideas are even aimed in the right direction.

As for the rest of us lets try to keep this on topic guys and if you have any useful suggestions on how to modify the incursions to balance them out a bit better, now would be the time to post them.

Just from my own experience, OTA's seem to be taking the longest (at least for BS shield fleets) by at least a couple minutes. Again, I think that if the Niarjas or (preferrably) the Maras were removed they would be on par with NCO's as far as difficulty and time. Really the NCO's and NMC's havent seemed very bothersome to me in shield fleets but that's just my .02 isk. We dont use hackers or at least we havent been so moving the array wouldnt make it any easier for us but i think it's a solid idea as well for those that need that to complete the sites.
xVx dreadnaught
Space Telentics Systems Inc
#357 - 2012-05-03 13:20:19 UTC
CCP Affinity wrote:
Just an update, I am reading through all this feedback and we will be making a more detailed post next week about our own findings. I have also had some really valuable feedback, both while the changes were on SISI and now they are on TQ, from the owner and co-owner of BTL pub and other long-term Incursion runners. I have even run Incursions on SISI with them to see how they felt about the changes live.

I don't have anything concrete to tell you right now, but I just wanted to make an update post to let you all know I am still reading this and we do care!

I fully understand that a lot of you are angry but if we could all try and aim for constructive feedback from now on, it will help quicken this process a lot.
''I HATE IT ALL!! YOU SUCK'' <-- an example of a post that isn't going to help.

To dispel any myths - The changes on SISI and TQ were exactly the same, this isn't even up for debate as it's just a fact and it's just how our development process works.



Can you possibly explain to me, maybe it's something I've just not understood or missed.

But why are Incursions the only instance in eve, where the harder, longer more effort involved actions (headquarter sites) are the lowest income per hour, when compared to the lesser sites. Such as Assaults and Vanguards?

If this same strange structure was ported over to mission runners, no one would ever go above lvl 2 missions..

I can understand that incursions weren't meant to be farmed at Vanguard levels to the point of almost exploitation. it's my opinion that they were supposed to build up to bigger fleets and bring more people together... A lot of small Vanguard fleets, leaves a combative feeling and resentment within communities. But building up to Assaults and Headquarters brings more groups of people together. But the incentive to make bigger fleets isn't there People are more likely to leave incursions back to mission than build up to Assaults. When there is no real financial benefit to make more effort and take bigger risks.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#358 - 2012-05-03 14:53:32 UTC
Galerak wrote:
Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!

Why CCP? Fleet members have all the things to reward fleet commanders. The same is for logistic ships.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#359 - 2012-05-03 16:41:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
CCP Affinity wrote:
Just an update, I am reading through all this feedback and we will be making a more detailed post next week about our own findings. I have also had some really valuable feedback, both while the changes were on SISI and now they are on TQ, from the owner and co-owner of BTL pub and other long-term Incursion runners. I have even run Incursions on SISI with them to see how they felt about the changes live.

I don't have anything concrete to tell you right now, but I just wanted to make an update post to let you all know I am still reading this and we do care!

I fully understand that a lot of you are angry but if we could all try and aim for constructive feedback from now on, it will help quicken this process a lot.
''I HATE IT ALL!! YOU SUCK'' <-- an example of a post that isn't going to help.

To dispel any myths - The changes on SISI and TQ were exactly the same, this isn't even up for debate as it's just a fact and it's just how our development process works.


Please stick to your guns on this one.

Everyone who was NOT an incursion farmer (including CCP) could see the problem with the initial system. People should not have been able to make anywhere near that kind of money in "safe" space, that is supposed to be the inherent purpose of eve's sec status system.

I live in null sec and make my isk mostly by shooting npcs in anomalies in an upgraded system (dual boxing a mach and a tengu usually, it's NPC slaughter I tell you)). ONE GUY with a cloaky ship coming into system and staying there can shut me down, but im not complaining about that, that's actualy something to balances the fact that I can make so much an hour shooting rats that respawn. Either I have to stop, or (more liekly) i alert my allaince to a possible hotdrop and refit as cyno/bait (and a good time is had by all :) ).

Then I went and took a nightmare into a few shiny incursion fleets with a buddy of mine who is in one of the more well known incursion corps. OMFG, I made the same kind of isk with one ship in high sec in an incursion fleet that it takes me 2 ships to make in null. sure, in the incursions there were 10 other folks (one of grid boosting), but there was NEVEr any shortage of incursion pick up fleets looking for shiny ships even if I hadn't already hooked up with my buddies corp.

Of course I liked the isk and LP (bought some +6 implants when i had enough), but it just kind of bordered on obsecene to me, it was obvioulsy broken. i thought level 4 missions in high sec was bad (I still think that), but this is worse.

So please, stick to your guns, you shouldn't be able to do what people were doing before, not in high sec where there is less risk.
xVx dreadnaught
Space Telentics Systems Inc
#360 - 2012-05-03 17:26:25 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


Please stick to your guns on this one.

Everyone who was NOT an incursion farmer (including CCP) could see the problem with the initial system. People should not have been able to make anywhere near that kind of money in "safe" space, that is supposed to be the inherent purpose of eve's sec status system.

I live in null sec and make my isk mostly by shooting npcs in anomalies in an upgraded system (dual boxing a mach and a tengu usually, it's NPC slaughter I tell you)). ONE GUY with a cloaky ship coming into system and staying there can shut me down, but im not complaining about that, that's actualy something to balances the fact that I can make so much an hour shooting rats that respawn. Either I have to stop, or (more liekly) i alert my allaince to a possible hotdrop and refit as cyno/bait (and a good time is had by all :) ).

Then I went and took a nightmare into a few shiny incursion fleets with a buddy of mine who is in one of the more well known incursion corps. OMFG, I made the same kind of isk with one ship in high sec in an incursion fleet that it takes me 2 ships to make in null. sure, in the incursions there were 10 other folks (one of grid boosting), but there was NEVEr any shortage of incursion pick up fleets looking for shiny ships even if I hadn't already hooked up with my buddies corp.

Of course I liked the isk and LP (bought some +6 implants when i had enough), but it just kind of bordered on obsecene to me, it was obvioulsy broken. i thought level 4 missions in high sec was bad (I still think that), but this is worse.

So please, stick to your guns, you shouldn't be able to do what people were doing before, not in high sec where there is less risk.


Please stop saying there is more risk in Null sec... you just confirmed that you are perfectly safe if someone does come across you in your system, that you are not likely to die... because you either don't do the sites or you bait a Hotdrop... which of those two options are a risk?

Is your alt going to turn on you and grief you? Is your alt going to refuse reps? is your alt going to warp out the logi squad so you die and get your stuff looted by his friends?

No, these things all happen in incursions. So much so that we have to keep a list of the assholes that do them, to protect ourselves against the risk of being griefed by can flippers, logi gankers, rep withholders and suicidal ECM'ers... Yes some people can do incursions for a long time and never be griefed. But you cannot say that the Incursion community is "Risk Free"

I've no problem with reducing the income per hour, but I just hate when people say "Risk Free" because it is definitely not risk free I lost a multi-billion isk fit Paladin because a Logi held back on Reps. Are you saying that was risk free?