These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP - End Highsec Incursions

First post First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#961 - 2015-05-23 05:10:32 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
We are wandering off topic, here.

I agree with whoever said earlier that the main issue is perception vs truth in income and isk flow. Grass is always greener and 'we got it tough, up hills both ways in the snow' start to muddy the waters. Then ridiculous maxima are thrown about as if they are what every person engaged in that activity makes as opposed to what the most efficient bling fleet can take down.

muddy water

If something is good, people will go to it, that will diminish the returns due to either market forces or diminishing availability of the resource itself. Incursions have a carrying capacity beyond which the returns drop. I assume the same goes for null anoms and even moons. Wormholes and faction war? Each seems to have an upper limit of income and then it becomes how is it divided and allocated. Is it to a group, to the solo pilot? To the holding corp or alliance?

Last thing we want is someone horning in on OUR income but you might like more targets to shoot so you ask for other incomes to be nerfed to the point that yours is the only game in town. But that isn't what Eve is or what it shuld be. Some people want to be solo, let them. Others like running with a group of people, that should be allowed as well as an income stream. Large organizataions need their income to stay viable . . . moons.

Conclusion for me is that if YOU think all the money is in Incursions then run them. Either it will make the payouts lessen as people compete for the resource or you will get rich.

No, I do not support nerfing them (though I would like to see the scouts sites rewritten)

m


We do run them, that's the problem. Its not a case of people being jealous of other peoples grass being greener its about pointing out big problems with game imbalances that we are actively abusing.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#962 - 2015-05-23 05:28:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
baltec1 wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
We are wandering off topic, here.

I agree with whoever said earlier that the main issue is perception vs truth in income and isk flow. Grass is always greener and 'we got it tough, up hills both ways in the snow' start to muddy the waters. Then ridiculous maxima are thrown about as if they are what every person engaged in that activity makes as opposed to what the most efficient bling fleet can take down.

muddy water

If something is good, people will go to it, that will diminish the returns due to either market forces or diminishing availability of the resource itself. Incursions have a carrying capacity beyond which the returns drop. I assume the same goes for null anoms and even moons. Wormholes and faction war? Each seems to have an upper limit of income and then it becomes how is it divided and allocated. Is it to a group, to the solo pilot? To the holding corp or alliance?

Last thing we want is someone horning in on OUR income but you might like more targets to shoot so you ask for other incomes to be nerfed to the point that yours is the only game in town. But that isn't what Eve is or what it shuld be. Some people want to be solo, let them. Others like running with a group of people, that should be allowed as well as an income stream. Large organizataions need their income to stay viable . . . moons.

Conclusion for me is that if YOU think all the money is in Incursions then run them. Either it will make the payouts lessen as people compete for the resource or you will get rich.

No, I do not support nerfing them (though I would like to see the scouts sites rewritten)

m


We do run them, that's the problem. Its not a case of people being jealous of other peoples grass being greener its about pointing out big problems with game imbalances that we are actively abusing.


And just to add to that, no one is seriously asking to remove incursions and ruin someone else's fun. Just rein them in a bit so that someone who is looking at their options for the highest ISK/hr isn't forced to choose highsec incursions because the risk vs reward balances for them is just head-and-shoulders above almost everything else in the game.

People should not feel that they cannot earn a living in their chosen home. On an individual level is this not just a perception - it is a fact that there is no other way to make near the maximum PvE income with so little risk - and people are leaving more dangerous space because of this.

EDIT: I'll just add a personal anecdote to highlight how important risk vs. reward is. I am a mostly solo player, but I am now quite comfortable leaving highsec and doing many things in the game. The first time I went to lowsec was to set up a PI operation. Why? Because the planets offered significantly more reward than highsec so I took the risk. The first time I went to null? It was for exploration sites for exactly the same reason. Now I make most of my income trading, but if I want to relax with some PvE I run gas sites in wormholes as although it is risky, is the most lucrative way to mine for a solo player to mine and I don't mind taking that risk for the greater reward.

But if I gave up trading and want to scale up my PvE activities to make the most ISK for a specific goal? Looking at what is on offer there is no choice. I would have to grind highsec incursions (or possibly lowsec FW missions) because nothing else holds a candle to the risk vs. reward balance for making ISK.

Risk vs. reward matters. It does influence people's gameplay. And right now people are being forced to run highsec incursions whether they like them or not.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#963 - 2015-05-23 08:29:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
Sitting in a trade hub and buying/selling has no risk what so ever. Please remove that cash cow from the game.

And please make it so I don't have to leave the safety of my nullsec zerg of death to make isk.


Again with this myth.

Trading is PvP and it is very risky. Just ask anyone who had investments in genelution implants.

I'd like to see a bit more direct PvP, maybe in the form of the seller's/buyer's name and corp on orders.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#964 - 2015-05-23 11:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
baltec1 wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
Sitting in a trade hub and buying/selling has no risk what so ever. Please remove that cash cow from the game.

And please make it so I don't have to leave the safety of my nullsec zerg of death to make isk.


Again with this myth.

Trading is PvP and it is very risky. Just ask anyone who had investments in genelution implants.


And inherently pays a very substantial portion of the ISK sinks to keep the system healthy.

Definitely a myth that it is risk-free - I've lost billions before to fat finger order modifications. Pirate

Zappity wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
Sitting in a trade hub and buying/selling has no risk what so ever. Please remove that cash cow from the game.

And please make it so I don't have to leave the safety of my nullsec zerg of death to make isk.


Again with this myth.

Trading is PvP and it is very risky. Just ask anyone who had investments in genelution implants.

I'd like to see a bit more direct PvP, maybe in the form of the seller's/buyer's name and corp on orders.


Nyaah.

The real marketplace has always been anonymous to professionals. Amateurs proclaim their presence, positions and exposure with tens of billions ISK-worth of commodities in a single sell order.
Carrie-Anne Moss
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#965 - 2015-08-20 03:40:25 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
We are wandering off topic, here.

I agree with whoever said earlier that the main issue is perception vs truth in income and isk flow. Grass is always greener and 'we got it tough, up hills both ways in the snow' start to muddy the waters. Then ridiculous maxima are thrown about as if they are what every person engaged in that activity makes as opposed to what the most efficient bling fleet can take down.

muddy water

If something is good, people will go to it, that will diminish the returns due to either market forces or diminishing availability of the resource itself. Incursions have a carrying capacity beyond which the returns drop. I assume the same goes for null anoms and even moons. Wormholes and faction war? Each seems to have an upper limit of income and then it becomes how is it divided and allocated. Is it to a group, to the solo pilot? To the holding corp or alliance?

Last thing we want is someone horning in on OUR income but you might like more targets to shoot so you ask for other incomes to be nerfed to the point that yours is the only game in town. But that isn't what Eve is or what it shuld be. Some people want to be solo, let them. Others like running with a group of people, that should be allowed as well as an income stream. Large organizataions need their income to stay viable . . . moons.

Conclusion for me is that if YOU think all the money is in Incursions then run them. Either it will make the payouts lessen as people compete for the resource or you will get rich.

No, I do not support nerfing them (though I would like to see the scouts sites rewritten)

m


We do run them, that's the problem. Its not a case of people being jealous of other peoples grass being greener its about pointing out big problems with game imbalances that we are actively abusing.


I think im going to start runnimg them on an alt.
Bet i can plex my account in a few hours one weekend a month.
Goodbye sub fee
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#966 - 2015-08-20 03:47:04 UTC
Carrie-Anne Moss wrote:
I think im going to start runnimg them on an alt.
Bet i can plex my account in a few hours one weekend a month.
Goodbye sub fee

Or you can go get your job back at walmart, work a weekend, and keep your account going all year w/o needed to farm your life away. Just a thought...

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two
#967 - 2015-08-20 04:39:47 UTC
I hope they remove isk from the game, its bad for it.
Spurty
#968 - 2015-08-20 10:49:36 UTC
Sasha Sen wrote:
I hope they remove isk from the game, its bad for it.


And kill mails.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#969 - 2015-08-20 10:54:21 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
Sasha Sen wrote:
I hope they remove isk from the game, its bad for it.


And kill mails.


And ships too. All the obsession over ships is just unhealthy. Once they remove ships, modules become unnecessary, so they can go ahead and remove those too.
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#970 - 2015-08-20 11:09:04 UTC
Wonder if somebody will start null sec pve nerf threads.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#971 - 2015-08-20 11:29:11 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Wonder if somebody will start null sec pve nerf threads.


Where have you been? The primary defensive whine when people bring up how obscene incursions are is about null ratting. Nevermind that at best it's half of what incursions make AND requires a carrier to make that much AND comes in the far inferior form of liquid isk.

Income as a whole needs rebalanced from the ground up(with risk vs reward being the key component), because in pretty much every level of space bar wormholes it is broken.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#972 - 2015-08-20 11:55:46 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Wonder if somebody will start null sec pve nerf threads.


Where have you been? The primary defensive whine when people bring up how obscene incursions are is about null ratting. Nevermind that at best it's half of what incursions make AND requires a carrier to make that much AND comes in the far inferior form of liquid isk.

Income as a whole needs rebalanced from the ground up(with risk vs reward being the key component), because in pretty much every level of space bar wormholes it is broken.



There is no whine as I don't run incursions. I'm simply annoyed by the huge amount of "nurf dat" number of threads that popped up after fuzzy sov made isk ticks uncertain in the blue goatze.

Btw, what risk there is behind renting ratting space in null?

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#973 - 2015-08-20 12:16:39 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Wonder if somebody will start null sec pve nerf threads.


Where have you been? The primary defensive whine when people bring up how obscene incursions are is about null ratting. Nevermind that at best it's half of what incursions make AND requires a carrier to make that much AND comes in the far inferior form of liquid isk.

Income as a whole needs rebalanced from the ground up(with risk vs reward being the key component), because in pretty much every level of space bar wormholes it is broken.



There is no whine as I don't run incursions. I'm simply annoyed by the huge amount of "nurf dat" number of threads that popped up after fuzzy sov made isk ticks uncertain in the blue goatze.


I guess you missed how old this thread is, and how we've been talking about this imbalance for almost 6 years...


Quote:

Btw, what risk there is behind renting ratting space in null?


The risk of not being able to care for it because unfriendly people are always there looking to kill you, and unlike in high sec incursions, magical space police won't come and help you? You mean that risk?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#974 - 2015-08-20 12:21:26 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
We are wandering off topic, here.

I agree with whoever said earlier that the main issue is perception vs truth in income and isk flow. Grass is always greener and 'we got it tough, up hills both ways in the snow' start to muddy the waters. Then ridiculous maxima are thrown about as if they are what every person engaged in that activity makes as opposed to what the most efficient bling fleet can take down.

muddy water

If something is good, people will go to it, that will diminish the returns due to either market forces or diminishing availability of the resource itself. Incursions have a carrying capacity beyond which the returns drop. I assume the same goes for null anoms and even moons. Wormholes and faction war? Each seems to have an upper limit of income and then it becomes how is it divided and allocated. Is it to a group, to the solo pilot? To the holding corp or alliance?

Last thing we want is someone horning in on OUR income but you might like more targets to shoot so you ask for other incomes to be nerfed to the point that yours is the only game in town. But that isn't what Eve is or what it shuld be. Some people want to be solo, let them. Others like running with a group of people, that should be allowed as well as an income stream. Large organizataions need their income to stay viable . . . moons.

Conclusion for me is that if YOU think all the money is in Incursions then run them. Either it will make the payouts lessen as people compete for the resource or you will get rich.

No, I do not support nerfing them (though I would like to see the scouts sites rewritten)

m


We do run them, that's the problem. Its not a case of people being jealous of other peoples grass being greener its about pointing out big problems with game imbalances that we are actively abusing.


You can tell him and people who think like him that over and over and over and over again, complete with screen shots of your own wallet and a video of you yourself flying a ship in a high sec incursion fleet and they will STILL default to that "you are just jealous of other people's income" line.

They have to do that, people who know they are wrong have to modify the terms of the argument to make themselves less wrong, as this is way easier than acknowledging an uncomfortable (and less profitable...) truth. The funny thing is most of the people supporting an obviously broken system don't even run incursions of any kind at all, they are simply defending their 'ideological homeland' aka High sec.
Horus V
The Destined
#975 - 2015-08-20 12:36:45 UTC
+1

V

Crystalline Entity
Black Dragon PHP
#976 - 2015-08-20 12:44:07 UTC
I am pretty important as is my allice
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#977 - 2015-08-20 12:54:25 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Wonder if somebody will start null sec pve nerf threads.


Where have you been? The primary defensive whine when people bring up how obscene incursions are is about null ratting. Nevermind that at best it's half of what incursions make AND requires a carrier to make that much AND comes in the far inferior form of liquid isk.

Income as a whole needs rebalanced from the ground up(with risk vs reward being the key component), because in pretty much every level of space bar wormholes it is broken.



There is no whine as I don't run incursions. I'm simply annoyed by the huge amount of "nurf dat" number of threads that popped up after fuzzy sov made isk ticks uncertain in the blue goatze.


I guess you missed how old this thread is, and how we've been talking about this imbalance for almost 6 years...


Quote:

Btw, what risk there is behind renting ratting space in null?


The risk of not being able to care for it because unfriendly people are always there looking to kill you, and unlike in high sec incursions, magical space police won't come and help you? You mean that risk?



Don't think you got my question.

I asked what risk is there for you, as sov owner, to rent a few systems to other players for ratting purposes. You can sit on your butt , docked, while billions roll in corp account without doing nadda. You don't risk anything, the players who pay you the rent (in order to rat) are risking their ships.

Be serious there are no unfriendly people in null, they're all blue and if you see red in local you leave or dock because there's no magical police around to help you. Or are you trying to tell me you take your ratting carrier in hostile space?

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#978 - 2015-08-20 13:10:10 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:


Don't think you got my question.

I asked what risk is there for you, as sov owner, to rent a few systems to other players for ratting purposes. You can sit on your butt , docked, while billions roll in corp account without doing nadda. You don't risk anything, the players who pay you the rent (in order to rat) are risking their ships.


And what exactly does the above have to do with anything. Also, why no comparison to how much isk Incursion community leaders are skimming off the top (you know it's they who provide the boosters who get tipped after every site by 40-50 people in fleet, as well as usually being the same people who seed the incursion focus markets with needed items and even run ship transport services).

That alliance leader guy is at risk of losing his space thus not being able to rent, NOTHING but the closing of Tranquility can stop the money train enjoyed by the (at best) couple dozen individuals who dominate the Incursions Communities. So again, why are you worried about null leaders when ignoring the same behavior from incursion community leaders?

Quote:

Be serious there are no unfriendly people in null, they're all blue and if you see red in local you leave or dock because there's no magical police around to help you. Or are you trying to tell me you take your ratting carrier in hostile space?



I don't rat in a carrier. I rat in Deadspace fit Machariels and Tengus and Ishtars and Gilas and the occasional Rattlesnake . And I go into hostile territory (Scalding Pass, Detorid, even Curse) with them all the time. Can't post killmails here, but I lost a rattlesnake in Wicked Creek on an alt on the 6th of last month. You can find it on zkillboard, that alt is in the same corp you see me in. Ironic thing is that it was NCDot, my former alliance, that killed me.

From the sounds of it, you don't have much experience with PVE, or with null, and probably not with incursions specifically.
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#979 - 2015-08-20 14:19:51 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


From the sounds of it, you don't have much experience with PVE, or with null, and probably not with incursions specifically.


That's correct. No incursion experience what so ever.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#980 - 2015-08-20 14:29:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Gimme Sake wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


From the sounds of it, you don't have much experience with PVE, or with null, and probably not with incursions specifically.


That's correct. No incursion experience what so ever.



I figured as much, because most of the people that defend such an obviously broken situation tend to be that way.

The actual truth is that incursion runners KNOW that it's crazy to make that kind of income in the safety of high sec and are just milking it because it exists, I sure as hell was. Hellfire, a sizable portion of the incursion running community are people like me (non-high sec players using high sec alt).

I have not run high sec incursions since I came back to null about 2 months ago, but last time I did I was on TVP comms and people were talking openly about their null alliances. One guy even posted a killmail in teamspeak chat, of a Sabre that his AFK ISHTAR (he has 3 of them running while he incursions....and still makes more from the incursion btw) had just auto-killed somewhere up north (the ishtar character was a member of 'Get Off My Lawn').


But yea, color me surprised that you don't know a thing about the thing you decided to post about lol.