These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

incursions are slowly killing off LP store profits

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#41 - 2011-10-19 14:27:40 UTC
Lek Arthie wrote:

What should be nerfed first of all is moon goo, when that is nerfed, come again.


Yeah I want higher T2 prices too.

Nice try pubbie.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#42 - 2011-10-19 14:34:00 UTC
CCP Dropbear wrote:
Cearain wrote:
We would actually need some numbers to determine if this is the case.


As far as I know we're still looking into gathering some numbers (meaning a request was filed with our awesome Research and Statistics crew, and I should follow it up!). The plan wasn't to look at LP though, but at the larger picture of overall mission and incursion completion rates. One goal behind Incursion was to get people out of their solo PvE mission runner mindset and into a group, dealing with more PvP-like scenarios (logistics, for one). Ideally, Incursions should compete with missions for income, mostly because they teach a player so much more than standalone missions ever can, and draw them into PvP much more effectively.

Tl;dr moral of the story is that the popularity and consequent economic impact of Incursions, if they're at the same time really moving people out of missions, is probably ultimately a better system than missions as the sole and primary income stream.


I am glad that ccp is working to increase the pvp in the game. Several of the changes they have made have severely decreased it. I think this includes the dominion insurance nerf and some others.

In this case I think you are probably hurting pvp in eve not helping. Your assumption is that people who do high sec missions do not already pvp. You seem to leave out the idea that many pvpers do the level 4s as a means to support their pvp. Your analysis above is not considering that if you dilute their income they will have less isk to use in pvp. Let me explain:

I tend to think that more of the people running high sec level 4 missions are pvpers than those who run high sec incursions. If this is correct then making incursions trump level 4 mission runners will actually decrease pvp in eve.

Why do I think a larger percent of mission runners are pvpers than the percent of incursion runners? Becasue although I'm sure the incursion ai is nice, it is not likely as fun as pvp. So if someone is going to have the time to find an incursion and wait for a fleet to form they will also have the time to get in a pvp fleet.

Its only those times when they do not have the time for that that they will do some isk making. High sec missions are less demanding on time. Therefore I would think that more pvpers are doing high sec mission than incursions. Other than the people who just want to see the novelty of incursions, I would guess that incursion runners are more the hard core pvers who never do pvp.

Hence by boosting incursion payouts you are hurting more pvpers than you are helping.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Goose99
#43 - 2011-10-19 14:40:40 UTC
Lek Arthie wrote:
Where is the risk when your alliance leaders moon mine huge amounts of moon materials, which most of them keep for themselves and have you as meat shield to protect them? No risk at all, even if someone decides to try to take it, it would take maybe even a month to push one alliance out, not to mention huge amount of people to back him up days and nights with expensive ships....
Cant really see the risk, and how easy this risk materializes, and thats why we see all those numerous titans and motherships like they are t1 cruisers.... because the amount of isk generated in 0.0 is immense.
Did i mention that its almost afk money? minus a couple of times per week to fuel.... CCP even gave you JF to make fueling even easier so your leaders can generate even more without risk. Didnt see YOU complain about that.
On top of that you are in 0.0 you have upgraded systems with numerous plexes and sites and anomalies and even belt rats that you can do ALONE without the help of anyone and get all the isk for yourself, and im not mentioning the chance to get very expensive deadspace and officer mods....
Btw low sec incursions have way bigger risk than your 0.0 ones, that you do with 0.0000000000001% risk instead of 0%. Your alliance owns the space you have local and you can just wrp out when you see hostiles, and continue afterwards, where is the risk in that?....... plus full 100% rewards instead of 75% in empire.

No you dont complain about all those things, you complain because you did incursions and you realize that you cant make so much money from lp store rewards that you expected...... So you ask CCP to just nerf high sec ones so you can make more money.
You are in 0.0 you have so many advantages and so many choices to make huge money yet you whine about a way that affects empire.....

Get your facts right ignorant.

What should be nerfed first of all is moon goo, when that is nerfed, come again.


There were mentions by devs of adding moo goo production into pi at one point. Somehow nothing came of that...
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#44 - 2011-10-19 15:10:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Ammzi
Cearain wrote:


Why do I think a larger percent of mission runners are pvpers than the percent of incursion runners? Becasue although I'm sure the incursion ai is nice, it is not likely as fun as pvp. So if someone is going to have the time to find an incursion and wait for a fleet to form they will also have the time to get in a pvp fleet.


You're so wrong.
I just asked in fleet (incursion) how many of them PVP'ed. Out of the 11 active in fleet, 9 of them PVP.
TriadSte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2011-10-19 16:09:50 UTC
Agree with mega nerfing moon goo and T2 manufacter. Id pay double or triple the isk for a T2 ship I think they're worth it.

Make 0.0 ......better than it is, Its stagnant & dying. Needs refreshing totally.

Make 0.0 accessible for every player, stop the blobs, nerf goo!
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#46 - 2011-10-19 16:19:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
XXSketchxx wrote:
Lek Arthie wrote:

What should be nerfed first of all is moon goo, when that is nerfed, come again.


Yeah I want higher T2 prices too.

Nice try pubbie.



Depends on the Nerf. Prices are high because the supply is limited (by cartel, or just rarity). Increase the supply, the price for goo will fall. Which means the price for T2 will fall. Or should, at least.

Say, by allowing for limited production of goo through PI, in high low and null.

A nerf that reduces supply, well, that'll have next to no effect on the faucet. Lower supply would equal higher price for that supply.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
JackStraw56
Run Like an Antelope
#47 - 2011-10-19 17:22:33 UTC  |  Edited by: JackStraw56
Why are LP store items unprofitable right now is what you need to ask.

The price that the goods from the LP stores sell for is increasing, not decreasing, there is not a problem of too much supply of faction goods.

The reason prices are increasing on faction mods is that the tag prices are getting so high. That are many items that sell for less than the tags you need to make them would sell for.

So it doesn't seem like it's an oversupply of LP causing the issue here at all. It's a lack of supply of tags.

If the problem was an oversupply of LP (but still ample supply of tags) then we would be seeing drops in faction good prices across the board. This is not what we're seeing at all.
Tango Cainne
Coriault Combat Solutions Inc.
#48 - 2011-10-19 19:49:48 UTC
XXSketchxx wrote:
There is no risk in PvE, at least not from NPCs. Given its high sec, there is no risk.


I beg to differ. ;)
Josefine Etrange
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2011-10-19 21:20:18 UTC
XXSketchxx wrote:
mingetek wrote:
imo this is happening.
Concord lp should not be exhangable for empire at all.

also ccp should nerf high sec incursion rewards by 50% isk and lp.


Agree on all accounts.

However following this post, you will hear from a bunch of incursion pubbies who "risk" a lot in their terribly difficult high sec incursions and that the reward is just fine.


IF you cut them by 50% you cut them below l4s. Which leads to anothe can of worms, l4s should be cut by at least 25% at the same time.
Sassaniak
Deadspace Zombie Factory
#50 - 2011-10-19 21:52:04 UTC
Josefine Etrange wrote:
XXSketchxx wrote:
mingetek wrote:
imo this is happening.
Concord lp should not be exhangable for empire at all.

also ccp should nerf high sec incursion rewards by 50% isk and lp.


Agree on all accounts.

However following this post, you will hear from a bunch of incursion pubbies who "risk" a lot in their terribly difficult high sec incursions and that the reward is just fine.


IF you cut them by 50% you cut them below l4s. Which leads to anothe can of worms, l4s should be cut by at least 25% at the same time.



Im not exactly sure why you are cutting Isk production from incursions and from L4 missions,

is it to try to force people to get out to 0.0?
lowsec?

something about risk vs rewards?

you just dont like missioners?

you dont mission to support a pvp character? (so why should everyone else get to?)

I dont understand what you hope to accomplish by doing this, wount it mean that

A, people stop doing incursions and do more missions
B, People stop doing missions and do more incursions
C, People do more of each to gain the same amount of isk as pre-nerf
D, People run out to 0.0 and rat
E, People stop playing because they cant afford plex anymore
F, People stop being able to afford nice things for pvp alts
G, ?
H, Profit!

whats the end result and whats the hoped for result of changing the Isk payouts per mission/Incursion?

...............................................................................

Sometimes, you all make me very disappointed.
Josefine Etrange
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2011-10-19 22:23:28 UTC
Sassaniak wrote:
Josefine Etrange wrote:
XXSketchxx wrote:
mingetek wrote:
imo this is happening.
Concord lp should not be exhangable for empire at all.

also ccp should nerf high sec incursion rewards by 50% isk and lp.


Agree on all accounts.

However following this post, you will hear from a bunch of incursion pubbies who "risk" a lot in their terribly difficult high sec incursions and that the reward is just fine.


IF you cut them by 50% you cut them below l4s. Which leads to anothe can of worms, l4s should be cut by at least 25% at the same time.



Im not exactly sure why you are cutting Isk production from incursions and from L4 missions,

is it to try to force people to get out to 0.0?
lowsec?

something about risk vs rewards?


Incursions should give more isk than l4s, that simple. They would not if you cut their income by 50%. If you want to nerf incursions heavy, but still want players to actually play them, you need l4s getting an income cut aswell.

Furthermore I guess this would make the risk vs reward situation in low sec and wormholes as well better. *shrugs*
Return of investment is simply an issue for high risk areas, becaue you have to calc regular ship replacments into your balance, which reduces effectivly your income.


And by the way I do not agree on a 50% cut for incursions.
Comy 1
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2011-10-19 22:50:27 UTC
You want more isk from you lvl 4 missions? Stop declining the faction missions.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#53 - 2011-10-19 23:55:58 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Cearain wrote:


Why do I think a larger percent of mission runners are pvpers than the percent of incursion runners? Becasue although I'm sure the incursion ai is nice, it is not likely as fun as pvp. So if someone is going to have the time to find an incursion and wait for a fleet to form they will also have the time to get in a pvp fleet.


You're so wrong.
I just asked in fleet (incursion) how many of them PVP'ed. Out of the 11 active in fleet, 9 of them PVP.

Just because one incursion fleet had people who pvp doesn't mean I'm wrong. Also did you see their kill boards?

Incursions are more of full-time deal that you use your main for as opposed to a part time alt activity

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#54 - 2011-10-20 00:03:38 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Ammzi wrote:
Cearain wrote:


Why do I think a larger percent of mission runners are pvpers than the percent of incursion runners? Becasue although I'm sure the incursion ai is nice, it is not likely as fun as pvp. So if someone is going to have the time to find an incursion and wait for a fleet to form they will also have the time to get in a pvp fleet.


You're so wrong.
I just asked in fleet (incursion) how many of them PVP'ed. Out of the 11 active in fleet, 9 of them PVP.

Just because one incursion fleet had people who pvp doesn't mean I'm wrong. Also did you see their kill boards?

Incursions are more of full-time deal that you use your main for as opposed to a part time alt activity


Oh trust me. I know the general picture. I've been doing incursions for the past 9 months and I would know a thing or two about the people who do them and they are from ALL over New Eden.
Every single pilot you can imagine, wormholers, missioners, miners, pirates, griefers, nullsec, general traders, manufacturers and many more I have met in incursions.

Here you go: http://kb.eve-incursions.net/
That is the incursion runners killboard. Do missioners have a killboard like that? I doubt it.
Steelshine
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#55 - 2011-10-20 01:38:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Steelshine
TriadSte wrote:
Yet again this thread is simply 0.0 nomads moaning about how much empire people earn.

They're simply jealous that there -10 sec status stops them from running them.


I'm a 0.0 pilot and have +3ish sec status. You don't lose anything for combat in 0.0





edit: I think incursions are one of the best things to be added to eve, but right now income levels are so out of balance everywhere, I'd be nice to see a balancing pass that takes a look at pretty much every non industry or trade profession and streamlines them. It's not a good thing when certain aspects of the game are not done by any/very few people because other activities offer such better/easier/safer rewards.
Renix Xerar
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2011-10-20 01:58:16 UTC
I think a lot of people are missing the details. Most of the groups that farm vanguards are then taking that money and using it to fund low sec pvp. Have we forgotten the "useless, empty, nothing to shoot" low sec?

More importantly, high sec income isn't really the same as null sec income (disregarding numbers entirely) High sec income is gained without the backing of an alliance, also meaning that they have no goal to farm isk for.. In null, you immediately flop any made money into the war chest for your next campaign.

It really shouldn't matter what people make in high sec, because those aren't the same people that you're about to go up against for control of the region.. Point being, the inflated high sec isk carebears aren't causing an unfair advantage for those that make isk in null.
Goose99
#57 - 2011-10-20 02:08:58 UTC
Renix Xerar wrote:
I think a lot of people are missing the details. Most of the groups that farm vanguards are then taking that money and using it to fund low sec pvp. Have we forgotten the "useless, empty, nothing to shoot" low sec?

More importantly, high sec income isn't really the same as null sec income (disregarding numbers entirely) High sec income is gained without the backing of an alliance, also meaning that they have no goal to farm isk for.. In null, you immediately flop any made money into the war chest for your next campaign.

It really shouldn't matter what people make in high sec, because those aren't the same people that you're about to go up against for control of the region.. Point being, the inflated high sec isk carebears aren't causing an unfair advantage for those that make isk in null.


It's not causing anything because it's nothing compared to moon goo, Sanctums, plex, etc. If it's actually more isk, null bears would be coming into high in droves to make isk, and then it will be causing something...Roll
Maikhanh
Doomheim
#58 - 2011-10-20 02:19:07 UTC
Renix Xerar wrote:

More importantly, high sec income isn't really the same as null sec income (disregarding numbers entirely) High sec income is gained without the backing of an alliance, also meaning that they have no goal to farm isk for.. In null, you immediately flop any made money into the war chest for your next campaign.

they farm isk for faction mods, officer mods.

incursion should be nerf around 25%~30%, make it balance on risk vs reward scale
Goose99
#59 - 2011-10-20 02:21:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Goose99
Maikhanh wrote:
Renix Xerar wrote:

More importantly, high sec income isn't really the same as null sec income (disregarding numbers entirely) High sec income is gained without the backing of an alliance, also meaning that they have no goal to farm isk for.. In null, you immediately flop any made money into the war chest for your next campaign.

they farm isk for faction mods, officer mods.

incursion should be nerf around 25%~30%, make it balance on risk vs reward scale


Where do you think officer/deadspace mods come from? Let's just say it's not from the LP shops that highsec bears farm themselves. 25-30% nerf to null bears? It all goes around.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#60 - 2011-10-20 03:25:38 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Ammzi wrote:
Cearain wrote:


Why do I think a larger percent of mission runners are pvpers than the percent of incursion runners? Becasue although I'm sure the incursion ai is nice, it is not likely as fun as pvp. So if someone is going to have the time to find an incursion and wait for a fleet to form they will also have the time to get in a pvp fleet.


You're so wrong.
I just asked in fleet (incursion) how many of them PVP'ed. Out of the 11 active in fleet, 9 of them PVP.

Just because one incursion fleet had people who pvp doesn't mean I'm wrong. Also did you see their kill boards?

Incursions are more of full-time deal that you use your main for as opposed to a part time alt activity


Oh trust me. I know the general picture. I've been doing incursions for the past 9 months and I would know a thing or two about the people who do them and they are from ALL over New Eden.
Every single pilot you can imagine, wormholers, missioners, miners, pirates, griefers, nullsec, general traders, manufacturers and many more I have met in incursions.

Here you go: http://kb.eve-incursions.net/
That is the incursion runners killboard. Do missioners have a killboard like that? I doubt it.



I don't know what that board is. How many people are posting to that board and for how long?
72 kills 1 loss? Looks like they really play it safe.

Yes you will see all sorts doing incursions the first year it is out. People will check it out. But I suspect in the long run, incursions will be hardcore pve for hard core pvers.





Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815