Missions & Complexes

Now you're rambling ( a sure sign that you, deep down, understand what I'm saying , and experience pain because of that understanding).

I said nothing about burners at fanfest. I wasn't even at that one.

You're starting to lose it. Throttle back and think for a bit.

1, why do you cling to that? Why do you pretend to not understand that we are talking about lone character income potential.

And 2, how do you know? You've never done high end anom ratting, only beginner stuff with phoons and myrmydons. (lol myrm).

You are wrong by the way. Multiboxing null anomalies does not and physically can not pay as much as multiboxing an incursions toon with This Navy Raven running full clear missions for SOE.

Let me say something. I don't like you and you don't like me. But that's no reason for you to stop thinking and learning. So how about this: Why don't we get together and test it?

Or, if you follow the EVE way and trust no one and don't care to do that, would you accept screen shots of my wallet and journal entries when I am able to play after this weekend and I fire up my incursion and SOE mission toon again? You say you want proof, I am willing to provide it.

If you knew anything damn nub you'd know that this bickering is a 9/10 not a 10/10, because 9/10 escalate more than once like this thread!

(didn't want you to feel left out Chainsaw so threw you some shade ot make you feel welcomed)

Not at all. I like that people can engineer new concepts. We're not talking about elmiinationg that, but in many cases they pay too much.

It's jsut like the old super tracking 400/mil per hour tracking titans in null sec a few years ago. It was a genious use of them, it just paid to much, doing real damage to the game.



I've done so over and over.

A short list is:

Lower top potential from burner and al level 4 mission blitzing.

Either reduce pays outs or add more risk to high sec incursions

Hammer FW missions to the ground (players already gain LP from fw pvp, leave it at that, FW is supposed to be pure pvp not a farming simulator)

Leave non-FW low sec, npc null and wormhole space alone, they are fine.

For null, eliminate the afk-ability of anoms. Change awards scheme from all isk to half isk, half reedemable tags that drop in npc wrecks and have to be collected (and moved to empire to redeem). Add new items to signature complex/escalation site drop chances. But for Space-Gods sake don't up the isk rewards, too much isk in game to begin with.

There, a comprehensive plan for Combat PVE, which it seems none of you seem to care much about while defending a measurably broken status quo.



If 'play how they want' actually means 'make us of broken rewards mechanics', then you are right.



Which makes the fact that you have the wrong ideas about it more troubling lol.

I'm not imposing my thoughts on anyone. I'm telling the truth as I see and can measure it. I'm sorry you don't like that, but not everyone does. That's a personal problem for you to solve.

If you don't like the way i present it, tough.

The invitation extends to you. If you don't believe, I'm willing to show you.

Great, you've articulated it beautifully, in a way that is clear and concise. I congratulate you on your change of tack. Now to respond in kind:

Lowering the top rewards for burners? Fine, agreed. But lowering the blitzing reward? Can only be done if you lower the actual reward for the missions (hurting everyone who runs missions) or remove blitzing as a possibility, leaving full clears as the only solution, which will ruin them for a lot more people than the occasional blitzer.

Rebalance incursions risk reward? Again, you'll face a lot more resistance to that than the occasional blitzer. Not saying it's not desirable, but you're on to a loser I'm afraid.

Hammer fw? Possibly, as a pvp oriented activity, maybe it shouldn't have rewards, but then it would just be pvp. At least it has focus at the moment.

Eliminate afkability of anoms and make them drop the rewards rather than just pay? Couldn't agree more personally.

Leave all the stuff YOU want to do alone? Ah, now we're getting somewhere.

So what we have, is that the main thing you have been harping on about (Anize and her "exploit") is the main bit where you fall down. Take the rest of it and annoy ccp with it at their events as much as you like, see how far you get. If you don't like their game, play chess, that's quite well balanced after 7000 years of development.

Erm, What?

Deflection...

Everything is personal with you Jenn. Your own psychosis is forced on everyone on these forums because you have a personal crusade against people playing the game in a way that personally bothers you.

How about you just ignore the things you don't like, or find a game that better suits your needs. Let the rest of the people play the way they want.

I thought you left. You said you were.

Were do you people get "play my way" from "fix this imbalance"? Or do you honeslty think I want everyone to rat angels some days, run incursions other days and dip into a wormhole every now and again?

There is little I dislike in the game. What I dislike is intellectual dishonesty and the lengths people seem to want to go to to preserve advantage (even imaginary space ship game advantage).

It's not the 1st time I've experienced this here either. When there were High Sec lvl 5s I got into the same arguments. I even linked a post where CCP said they knew it was a bug (naively thinking that this would penetrate with the high sec lvl 5 runners, back then i had not yet learned about the backfire effect). Anytime people have an advantage (or they perceive that the advantage in question helps people the like or hurts people they don't), they get all kinds of irrational in it's defense.

I heard it all from "well, that's only one employee saying it's a bug, why don't you get CCP to put out a press statement sying it's a bug" to "it doesn't matter if it's a bug, it's good for the game because it lets players aspire to do big things without having to go through a gate camp!" to "it doesn't matter is they pay out 90k lp per misison, you have to have high standings and only a few people have that".

Every slippery, slimey dodge possible. And yep, when CCP got around to fixing the thing they called a bug for 3 years, the high seccers blasted everyone who told CCP the truth, like somehow we were doing it to hurt them personally. BTW it was the same thing, a lot of those HS lvl 5 runners were null sec people, same as with incursions and high end burner blitzing.

Say what you want, but these issue exists, and if you condone it you're on the wrong side for the wrong reasons.

They already did, a long time ago. about 75% of bounties come from null, because of all the AFKing. which is why AFKing is on my list of things that need to go.

AFKing makes null look rich but it just means people are alting it up with ishtars making 60 mil per hour. That's worse for the economy than incursions are.

But what you refuse to understand is that the problem with incursions is NOT a macro-economic problem, it's the porblem of the incentives they case for actual at the keyboard high end PVErs.



If you feel insulted by the truth , Im sorry. But it can't be helped, i call them like they are, and you are in denial.



This is the problem. This is why I offer to show you. You don't understand how things work. Null sec pve is not scaleable. Add even one more ship to your anom, and because of how bounties pay out (and the "overkill effect") you end up with less. The game punishes you for using alts.

Which is moot. Because WHY do that when you can use one character in the relative safety of high sec and make more than enough isk to do what you need to do while not dealing to the pita that is multiboxing.

This is also the draw of incursions. Being in an incursion fleet lets me use one character in high where I'd need 2 in null (and need to be able to defend to, or get both out of danger).

You talk of my insulting you, but you keep glossing over the things I tell you (and things that you could prove for yourself if you were interested, things i'm willing to share information with you about). What, exactly do you want me to think then?

[/quote]
Incursions: isk cap per character is kinda variable and slightly higher than null but isk cap per player is potentially very very high. There is however a character cap (1.5%-2% of eve).[/quote]

It is not slightly higher. You can test this yourself as i have. Take a mach and run with an incursion fleet. Take a mach to null (and pve when you are either not in a fleet, or not being chased). The difference between 90 mil (under peak conditions) and 150 mil plus lp (under peak conditions) is not "slightly, it's damn near double.

Even comparing incursion to incursion its no good, if you did have the rare null incursion pop up, you arne't goign to take a fleet of 2-5 bil is ships to do them, you take navy vexors and such. Because of the time it takes such ships to compelte the incursion, you have about the same isk in your wallet as if you'd just stayed in high sec.