Missions & Complexes

I have spent some time reading the in game channels and the discussions going on in there.

And have changed my mind to supporting leaving them the way they are.

They only pay out the rear end if you are willing to risk being ganked in a 2-3B isk ship. Otherwise it is about good lvl4 with early alt worthy.

And in exchange you risk big. You are betting your ship that the logi pilot doesn't F up or the chain doesn't break or an ECM gank fleet does not arrive.

It is extremely encouraging grouping and that is what EVE needs more right now.

If any changes are to be made they need to happen WELL after modular POS and corp changes as well as full faction warfare changes. Because those changes are going to pull some numbers away from incursions and then a more accurate reading of effect can be had.

Yeah? Come on, how likely is it to have your hisec incursion invaded by an ECM gank fleet?

Come to think of it, ECM gank fleets are a constant threat to PVEers galaxy-wide. Whenever I undock I pray to Shiva that one of the roaming ECM gank fleets isn't waiting for me outside.

I agree the Universal lp is likely the most horrible part of the incursion payout. Lp stores serve a purpose that one form of pve will not get farmed to death. If it does the amount of profit you make is decreased due to the increased supply of items that activity generates. By making the lp universal they basically make it so people farming incursions can overfarm as much as they want.

FW missions are a good example of this. They used to be a very good way to make isk. But then they got overfarmed and now the lp to isk conversion is horrible. People will stop doing them because the lp sucks. When people stop doing them the supply will decrease so the items will be valuable again. So there is a balance.

Incursions are basically unbalanced in every way. Pay way more isk than everything in high sec. It also gives you lp that will always be very valuable.

I always find it interesting that the missguided still use inflation as an argument for nerfing incursions.

[sarcasm]Have these idiots considered how much of a drop in the ocean incurions may be with isk generation when compared to the overall rewards from say mission running from the playerbase? And yet they never seem to point this out as a potential inflationary issue, wonder why? I assume its the feeble minded that can only look at obvious candidates due to individual earnings rather than the global issue, which presumably points to a jealousy for these individuals as opposed to any sensible economic argument[/sarcasm]

Another classic example of this selfish "propoganda" was blaming the PLEX spike. Yet it couldnt possibly co-incide with the Crucible expansion which was also the time period for which the price spike was evident as opposed to the long term period that incurions have been around for.

Please try to find more competent reasoning than the speculative scare mongering, it really does make you look so very foolish.

I'd say your completley missing the point. Assuming the figures are correct, which I doubt, your looking at ISK generation or faucets associated with Incursions "only" and missing everything else, as was my point, It's a blinkered view. Also you dont remove the income from plex being bought as this simply sloshes around the player base, it isnt lost as part of isk generation and needs to be kept as part of an inflation issue.

Also, if plex increases where a problem associated with incursion earnings then you'd have expected plex prices to gradually increased over time whilst they have been around as opposed to "spiking" dramatically prior to the Crucible expansion. So I will not concede that incursions are the main problem to the Plex changes. As your qouted 4500 Plex's are a drop in the ocean to the 100k+ plexes bought a month (based on Dec 2010 QEN), less than 5%.

Again looking at the QEN data the isk generated for the last month in December 2010 was roughly 42 Tril (last available data). This means that your faucet contribution from incursions is between 14% to 24% of the total ISK generating activities. And given potential increases in the player base and general improvements elsewhere in the player capabilities it can be reasonably expected that the total 42 Tril baseline back in 2010 would have increased, making the incursion ISK contribution potentially even less as is today.

This is even before looking at any changes applied by ISK sinks that may have been applied by CCP to help and ensure the balancing of the ISK IG. Wether ISK sinks are still needed I can't determine without up to date economy data. So even with all the faucets without understanding the full sink picture you cannot wholey determine if there is an inflation issue. This is a side issue however as irrespective of faucets if the sinks balance things out it doesnt matter much where the money is generated overall. Its also important to point out that the sums of money sloshing about which are simply moving from player to player through trades and other transactions (including plex) isnt associated with the faucet or sink amounts.

However, the point I will try to re-itterate is that incursions are "NOT" the major contributing factor to ISK generation and that is making a comparison by your supplied numbers. So labelling incursions as the main problem or reason for inflation is potentially a false conclusion to make even if like all other faucets it will contribute to any issues should they exist.

The idea of large personal wealth is a different issue entirely to any market inflation issue, which seems to be the conclusion and basis of your argument.

Exactly...
I just didn't have the numbers on the market and could only contribute to what I know about incursions.
Those numbers aren't exact - but they aren't far from being true either.
I personally even think that might be a bit too high a number average on the isk generation (so the ISK generation might be even lower than what I've postulated).

Fact is - PLEX were rising in price steadily BEFORE incursions and before the massive incursion agreement which is dated to:

12th of April 2011: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1495536

Why because baby dosnt like it.

HTFU you bloody little carebear

Why making ISK should be extra risky? It's already risky flying on PVE ships in high sec full of suicide gankers on Tornados.

In order to get more than you could just doing L4s smart you need a shiny ship. So it is a suicide gank risk. If you don't drive a shiny ship your income really really won't be anywhere in "that's op and causing inflation" range. Same shiny ship could be used smartly blitzing L4s and getting a bit less than with incursions. So switching to incursions does increase the risk. Now while losing a site to contest isn't (most of time) risk to your ship it is a risk to your ISK/hr rate.

And just sitting on highsec exit chokes is making people a bill or two every day without any risk whatsoever. Check the killboards and you will see successful pirates loosing couple billion of isk in ships every month (due to being able to afford them and "why the hell not" factor) and still having very nice positive KB ratios due to all the stuff they ganged in the meanwhile.

(seeing a guy who loses 3-5 PVP billion plus fit Tungus every month and still be 90+% on isk efficiency was a jawdrop moment for me. im still a green noob I know)