These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Incursion Mom Popping Solution

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Anthar Thebess
#61 - 2014-09-10 08:01:14 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
No one runs them in lowsec because it would be crazy to have a 40 man battleship fleet in lowsec. You would be begging to get hotdropped and massacred.


Except ... wait a second ...

INCURSION CONSTELLATIONS ARE CYNOJAMMED!

YOU CANNOT BE HOTDROPPED WHILE RUNNING INCURSIONS!


I'm sorry, I can't hear you over my covert cyno activating.


And all those bombers and blackops going POP.
Rats will aggo them , you have omni resist fleet on grid , including logistics.

Sorry , explain me what is wrong with putting more RISK to compensate REWARD you get from running incursion sites?

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#62 - 2014-09-10 08:51:45 UTC
Just go and shoot the people shooting the mom.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#63 - 2014-09-10 08:53:15 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Seriously though, if this were to happen then incursion income would need to be nerfed again to balance it all out.


Why doesn't OP just offer a bribe to the people popping the mom? You know the same way that mission thiefs and cosmos agent thiefs and other extortion rackets work?

So lon as you make more than you would missioning then it's still a viabke past time.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#64 - 2014-09-10 10:24:42 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Just go and shoot the people shooting the mom.


If CODE. can field enough low-ISK DPS to kill a freighter before CONCORD shows up, surely some incursionbears can field enough DPS to kill part of a logistics chain in that same amount of time, right?

After all, even shiny logi ships don't have the EHP of a freighter - especially if the scrams and weapons are prefired and the gank ships seboed.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#65 - 2014-09-10 10:34:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Anthar Thebess wrote:

And all those bombers and blackops going POP.
Rats will aggo them , you have omni resist fleet on grid , including logistics.

Sorry , explain me what is wrong with putting more RISK to compensate REWARD you get from running incursion sites?

Firstly, Nerf Highsec income you actually stagnate the game more. Because people won't leave highsec because it takes them longer to recover from any losses they take by doing so. Value is based on how long a person had to work to get something primarily. So halving high sec income actually makes them more carebear, not less.

Secondly, High Sec incursions are lower income than Low Sec Incursions, you get 70% of the payout in High sec.
Thirdly, they just made a change to allow larger fleets in Null Sec I believe it was, for incursions there. That could also be extended to low sec easily so you don't crazy buff any individual income but allow large group income.

Fourthly, go run incursions as an FC if they are so risk free. See how well it really goes with a bunch of brand new people and new FC's.

Fifthly, Meh, I don't care about popping of mums. It can be annoying if it's the one day I want to run an incursion, but there is so much competition over space in the fleets I can sit there making 0 isk for hours & hours while trying to get a fleet. As do most people in the incursion channels.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#66 - 2014-09-10 11:05:19 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Just go and shoot the people shooting the mom.


If CODE. can field enough low-ISK DPS to kill a freighter before CONCORD shows up, surely some incursionbears can field enough DPS to kill part of a logistics chain in that same amount of time, right?

After all, even shiny logi ships don't have the EHP of a freighter - especially if the scrams and weapons are prefired and the gank ships seboed.

Couple issues with that

  1. Light a scram, pull all the aggro off everything else on field, except something with jams.
  2. Then we add in speed and sig tanking, and the fact that only a truely stupid fleet stays on the beacons if there is a credible gank threat.
  3. Now, consider that many communities run 100-150% more logistics ships on grid than are necessary if one only has the aggro from sansha to worry about and you see it isn't as simple as ganking a logi or two.
  4. Destroying fleet discipline might work, and would be fairly simple if you knew when to time it and had an inside person.


Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#67 - 2014-09-10 14:37:31 UTC
Just a brief response to some of the points here

1. I stated pretty clearly already that the hotdrop would be on the way to the system or next door to it. The fact remains that no one is doing the 3 nullsec incursions right now, and the lowsec one is seeing very light activity. Objective reality always trumps theories.

2. Bribing/shooting people doing the MOM early - in addition to being very hard to pull off (incursion fleets shoot back, freighters don't), it's also wildly ineffective. Most people running incursions for a while can easily replace a lost ship. So coming up with some elaborate plan to blow up 2-3 ships won't accomplish much. And most people use their 1-man corp alts, so wardeccs are useless. There is no viable way to stop communities from blowing up the mothership site when they feel like it, short of a change from CCP. And its not the locals doing it, its nearly always one of the major communities.

3. Incursions are new player friendly. The base fittings are easily achievable by someone with 2-3 months in the game. And its a heck of a lot more fun and interesting that running a 15 man fleet for a Level 3 mission. I was bored to tears with L3 and L4 missions, incursions are what kept me in Eve.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#68 - 2014-09-10 15:25:24 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Veers Belvar wrote:
Just a brief response to some of the points here

1. I stated pretty clearly already that the hotdrop would be on the way to the system or next door to it. The fact remains that no one is doing the 3 nullsec incursions right now, and the lowsec one is seeing very light activity. Objective reality always trumps theories.


Then your scout next door tells you about it, you warp the fleet off and have a big bowl of no problem.

Low-Sec is seeing activity, despite the availability of low risk HS incursions? I thought:

Veers Belvar wrote:
No one runs them in lowsec because it would be crazy to have a 40 man battleship fleet in lowsec. You would be begging to get hotdropped and massacred.


As you say, "Objective reality always trumps theories."

Veers Belvar wrote:
2. Bribing/shooting people doing the MOM early - in addition to being very hard to pull off (incursion fleets shoot back, freighters don't), it's also wildly ineffective. Most people running incursions for a while can easily replace a lost ship.


So keep ganking them until they can't. As for difficulty; So? EVE is hard.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Klyith
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2014-09-10 15:47:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Klyith
James Baboli wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:

If CODE. can field enough low-ISK DPS to kill a freighter before CONCORD shows up, surely some incursionbears can field enough DPS to kill part of a logistics chain in that same amount of time, right?

After all, even shiny logi ships don't have the EHP of a freighter - especially if the scrams and weapons are prefired and the gank ships seboed.

Couple issues with that

  1. Light a scram, pull all the aggro off everything else on field, except something with jams.
  2. Then we add in speed and sig tanking, and the fact that only a truely stupid fleet stays on the beacons if there is a credible gank threat.
  3. Now, consider that many communities run 100-150% more logistics ships on grid than are necessary if one only has the aggro from sansha to worry about and you see it isn't as simple as ganking a logi or two.
  4. Destroying fleet discipline might work, and would be fairly simple if you knew when to time it and had an inside person.



Well then it seems clear that ganking in highsec incursions needs to be buffed in that case!


New proposal: systems with active incursions have CONCORD response delayed by 300%, and security loss for criminal actions is halved. Sanshas are attacking & suppressing concord too, obviously the police response will be ineffective in a warzone.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#70 - 2014-09-10 15:52:02 UTC
Klyith wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:

If CODE. can field enough low-ISK DPS to kill a freighter before CONCORD shows up, surely some incursionbears can field enough DPS to kill part of a logistics chain in that same amount of time, right?

After all, even shiny logi ships don't have the EHP of a freighter - especially if the scrams and weapons are prefired and the gank ships seboed.

Couple issues with that

  1. Light a scram, pull all the aggro off everything else on field, except something with jams.
  2. Then we add in speed and sig tanking, and the fact that only a truely stupid fleet stays on the beacons if there is a credible gank threat.
  3. Now, consider that many communities run 100-150% more logistics ships on grid than are necessary if one only has the aggro from sansha to worry about and you see it isn't as simple as ganking a logi or two.
  4. Destroying fleet discipline might work, and would be fairly simple if you knew when to time it and had an inside person.



Well then it seems clear that ganking in highsec incursions needs to be buffed in that case!


New proposal: systems with active incursions have CONCORD response delayed by 300%, and security loss for criminal actions is halved. Sanshas are attacking & suppressing concord too, obviously the police response will be ineffective in a warzone.


A lot of us enjoy the PvE content of incursions, and are not looking for PvP gank warfare. There is already ample opportunity for PvP in the game (low/null/wars). The question here is how to make the PvE content of incursions more available to the playerbase, and to prevent a few people from ruining it for everyone.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#71 - 2014-09-10 16:16:25 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:


A lot of us enjoy the PvE content of incursions, and are not looking for PvP gank warfare. There is already ample opportunity for PvP in the game (low/null/wars). The question here is how to make the PvE content of incursions more available to the playerbase, and to prevent a few people from ruining it for everyone.


No, what you want is to stop other people from doing "your" activity without doing anything yourself.

If you cannot be bothered to go kill them then you have no right to complain.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#72 - 2014-09-10 16:27:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


A lot of us enjoy the PvE content of incursions, and are not looking for PvP gank warfare. There is already ample opportunity for PvP in the game (low/null/wars). The question here is how to make the PvE content of incursions more available to the playerbase, and to prevent a few people from ruining it for everyone.


No, what you want is to stop other people from doing "your" activity without doing anything yourself.

If you cannot be bothered to go kill them then you have no right to complain.


No, what I'm trying to do is change a mechanic where a small group of players have the power to arbitrarily deny the ability to run incursions to everyone else in highsec. And killing them would wildly ineffective. The amount of pain and effort expended to gank 2-3 easily replaceable battleships would be immense, and of course it would just further motivate them to keep destroying motherships.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2014-09-10 16:43:08 UTC
This is a non issue, just like suicide ganking mining barges and freighters, or mission thieves, or any other kind of non-consensual interaction.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#74 - 2014-09-10 16:43:41 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:


No, what I'm trying to do is change a mechanic where a small group of players have the power to arbitrarily deny the ability to run incursions to everyone else in highsec.



They are doing exactly what is meant to happen, killing the mom. These things were not put into the game for you to farm away to your hearts content, if you don't want people killing the mom then go out there and kill them.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#75 - 2014-09-10 16:54:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


No, what I'm trying to do is change a mechanic where a small group of players have the power to arbitrarily deny the ability to run incursions to everyone else in highsec.



They are doing exactly what is meant to happen, killing the mom. These things were not put into the game for you to farm away to your hearts content, if you don't want people killing the mom then go out there and kill them.


I don't think CCP wants there to be a situation where there are no highsec incursions available to run (note how they recently changed the respawn timer). Your solution, as already pointed out, would not ameliorate the problem.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#76 - 2014-09-10 16:57:31 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

I don't think CCP wants there to be a situation where there are no highsec incursions available to run (note how they recently changed the respawn timer). Your solution, as already pointed out, would not ameliorate the problem.


Sure it would. You kill them and they cant do it.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#77 - 2014-09-10 17:31:54 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Why is this a problem? Sounds like player freedom being exercised to me.


This is where i get to say "you just described the problem, OTHER PEOPLE have freedom, Veer's no likey".
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#78 - 2014-09-10 17:35:34 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
For months (and longer) highsec incursions have been plagued by people completing the Kundalini site early. This forces everyone to move and allows one group of players to deny everyone else the ability to run sites together. The natural solution is to extend the time period during which the mothership cannot be destroyed (because it has not yet spawned).

I suggest that in HIGHSEC, and only in HIGHSEC -

The Kundalini site should not spawn until the incursion goes into withdraw (or at the very least until it is deeply into mobolized). This will allow pilots to stay longer at a single incursion site, and will not give any one group the ability to close down incursions early (as nearly all groups have done at one time or another).


The fact that incursions can be shut down in this fashion is the ONLY saving grace of the entire system. Also, these kinds of totally selfish 'let me farm longer' suggestions (where you ask CCP to intervene for you) are automatically bad. If you don't like what TVP or ISN is doing, stop them. Hire mercs to suicide gank their MOM fleet logistics in the Kundalini site for example.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#79 - 2014-09-10 17:45:48 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

I don't think CCP wants there to be a situation where there are no highsec incursions available to run (note how they recently changed the respawn timer). Your solution, as already pointed out, would not ameliorate the problem.


Sure it would. You kill them and they cant do it.


See https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 A total bust.

Can you gank some people and blow up ships? Sure. Can you inflict enough gank losses on a 40 man (or for a mom site 80 man) battleship fleet with 10+ logi on grid to actually deter doing mom sites? Absolutely not. Ganking is good for blowing up ships of individual players, and it has the force to bankrupt a new player...but ganking combat ships of wealthy and experienced players absolutely does not have sufficient force to compel them to stop doing mothership sites. No way, no how.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#80 - 2014-09-10 18:18:01 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Can you inflict enough gank losses on a 40 man (or for a mom site 80 man) battleship fleet with 10+ logi on grid to actually deter doing mom sites? Absolutely not.


Have you tried? Didn't think so.

Gank every MOM fleet's logi as they undock, see if they still try to run the site.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon