Missions & Complexes

It's not that vanguards pay too much, but rather that 10 man fleets are easy to form. Forming fleet is the most time consuming part. It's easy to take 10 mil every 5 minutes out of context, until you factor in the hour waiting time. Larger fleets just aren't worth the effort to form... or maintain, as people leaves midway.

Instead of being butthurt over vgs, suggest a fleet finder that's not useless, and improve highsec game mechanics so people are not paranoid in large pugs from safety concerns.

It is obvious they make too much isk per hour when you compare to lvl5s, sanctums and even c3-4 wormholes.

High sec incursions need to be nerfed down so you make slightly more lp and liquid isk per hour than lvl4 missions.

If it is fair then put 10/10s, lvl5s etc all in high sec too and how about c3/4 wormholes not taking forever to respawn so they are just as consistent money makers.

A post like this, to me at-least looks like a trolling attempt... I was hoping to see him reply with an alt at-least...

The biggest clue:
1 man corp.

thats what i think.
Also, the fleets that make that much isk have put in large amounts of organizational effort, have highly skilled characters, and have significant isk invested. If you dont have all of those things going for you (and at least most of your fleet), you make a whole lot less running even VGs.

Not only should assault and HQ even more so be more profitable (as per more difficult t organize and far higher risk), but Vanguard income should be drastically reduced.

Being in one of the more prominent T3 fleets all the time I rarely lose a contest, and doing nothing but NCOs is practically risk free. And yet I get the highest stable income in the game. While I love getting richer and richer every day, it's also somewhat ridiculous.

Jackk Hammer:

Your comparison with level 4 missions is ridiculous. Just look at the type of fleets that are required to run Vanguard incursions.

You can comfortably solo L4 missions in a solo Drake (!).
You can comfortably solo L5 missions in a solo Tengu.

Good luck surviving longer than 20s in a solo Tengu in a Vanguard site - or a drake.

So the higher income is justified in that you get warp scrammed, webbed to crap, you have extreme problems projecting your damage (especially for missile boats - hah!) receive insane amounts of damage, and even a frigate has a higher tank than most L4 battleships - while doing many times more damage compared to them as well.

The incursions vs other content ratio is somewhat fine. But the incursion sites dont scale with increasing size/difficulty - that is the problem.

You left one out

- 93.452% of all statistics used are made up out of thin air to add a basis for a bullshit argument

There.

This sounds familiar...

Kinda like when I took my C3 solo'ing Legion and went to grind standings with a new corp. L1s are easy as pie with Conflag and Scorch

I do agree, VGs are the most ran. The smaller fleets are easier to gather, and easier to maintain. The sites don't take nearly as long as the higher level. And the pay is great for what little time it takes.

The problem encountered, as already described, is having 150+ in local competing for 3-4 sites up at a time.

One solution I had thought of, was to change the solar system mechanic. Rather than saying "This solar system is Vanguard class" or whatever... just have varying spawns throughout the entire constellation. For any given system, there could be VG, assault, and HQs up at the same time. And then it would add some randomness to where the Mom spawns as well.

That way, fleets could distribute throughout the constellation evenly, competing for sites as they spawn rather than gang raping the 2-3 systems that are guaranteed to have VGs.

The real reason behind OP's posting is likely from either being burned out by vanguards or getting tired of all the competitions going on in vanguards in a crowded system.
I'm betting the latter.

No, I would actually strongly disagree at buffing* Assaults and HQs. The solution isn't always a straight forward "increase the reward" and let the players sort themselves out. Not only it impacts highsec incursions, but lowsec and null as well. The latter two have their own ecosystem in terms of isk making activities, just like highsec - there will be a ripple effect.

(*Good game design practice always look at more nerf-down than buff-up. This mitigates the eventual power-creep that will require more balancing down the road.
Player inputs are always inherently biased)

Look at the incursion scene right now, then peer back a few months ago. Notice any difference in the level of adaptation?
Given time, in any game or MMOs, puzzles or tasks will be solved/accomplished by players in the most efficient way possible (within the realm of the game mechanics).

There's really no denying that vanguards constitute the majority of isk income source for most incursions runners, but instead of looking at it from the narrow angle of isk/hr, look at the other factors that contributes to its popularity from a player perspective:

* typical preferred ship are T3 cruiser hulls (aside from the faction BS) - easy to transport
* fittings are uniform, close range high damage - maximum damage, shortens completion time
* quick to form a vanguard fleet - less hassle as fittings are uniform, beginner friendly and easy fleet management
* casual friendly - easy come, easy go.
* more FCs - as vanguard sites are fairly easy to learn and manage.
* simple logi management - don't have to deal with complicated cap chains.
* more mobile fleet - by virtue of size and composition.
* quick site completion - sub 5mins or less (for experienced fleets).

Now compare that to (non-isk) factors that make Assault/HQs unpopular:

* majority BS hulls - pain in the ass to move
* non-uniform fittings - need T3 fast boats, mid-range dps and snipers
* slow forming fleet - finding the right mix of T3/mid-range/sniper, several refits needed
* non-casual friendly - all the above (and more) takes time.
* very few FC - moderately complicated, learning is done by doing.
* proper logi management critical - 1U1D or 2D cap chain management, needs a logi commander.
* big fleet - you're bound to get a few stragglers
* site completions takes anywhere between 10-20mins, probably 20-60mins for NCN & TCRC if things don't go well.

For the average players all those factors matter, depending on their personal inclines. Isk/hr isn't necessarily the primary driving force behind their motivations. It's a pie with isk/hr taking a large chunk, while the rest are taken up by the others. Why do you think the majority of EVE players are Empire dwellers? Think about it.

Back to topic, the major issue with vanguards that allow 120mil isk/hr (or above) are the NCOs, and to a lesser extent the OTAs (after they patched it). The NMCs take an average 4-6mins to complete per site, and this more or less falls within the average income range . However, I've seen some novel ways where players shorten NMCs completion by using an alt in a blockade runner. The accel gate allow list for NMCs might need some re-evaluation

The simplest and easiest fix (with little collateral impact) is to adjust the completion time for NCO/OTAs to fall within whats needed.
How CCP may do this, can be left to the imagination. The same trick can be applied to Assault/HQ sites as well for the same reasons.
If you're having a hard time grasp this picture, think everyday groceries - nowadays you get less for the same price, many consumers hardly notice this sleight of hand.
They're however more sensitive to price changes.

Finally, at the same time, they also need to address some of the teething issues that makes it harder for players to form large incursion public fleets.
Plenty of fixes pop to mind, but that's really off topic.

Easier in the sense that dps is lower. Harder in the sense that you're limited to BS and cruiser logi.