These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1501 - 2015-11-27 23:56:39 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

So your solution is to nerf the one PVE content piece that REQUIRES player interaction...


No, the solution is to nerf something that can be mindlessly farmed, whose only real difficulty is in a cost barrier to the expensive ship needed to farm the site, that gives obscene levels of income for how easy and safe it is.

More PvE should be like Blood Raiders, and much, much less PvE should be like Incursions. One of those is actually fun, while the other is just a grind festival.

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1502 - 2015-11-28 00:05:14 UTC
Oh, and before you try and defend the obscene income of incursions by claiming the cost barrier justifies it, I'll just let you know right now that you're wrong to do it.

The cost barrier condemns it still further, since it punishes new players by setting it completely out of their reach and thereby creating a huge disparity in their earning power.

"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.

Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1503 - 2015-11-28 00:13:00 UTC
nerfing it will cause nullsec players to not bother with them and the people who really want to do them will have more chance and less waiting, whats the issue?

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#1504 - 2015-11-28 00:16:47 UTC
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
You feel you can restore the equilibrium by nerfing some niche content?


Yes. There's no reason to fight over what you can get without fighting.

Player driven conflict is the lifeblood of New Eden.


Market McSelling Alt wrote:
So your solution is to nerf the one PVE content piece that REQUIRES player interaction...


What part of multiboxing requires player interaction? Even in groups, it requires player interaction in only the most shallow sense, once you do the sites one time you understand almost everything you ever need to know, and nothing ever new happens or challenges the players. Takes maybe 30 minutes of interaction before all variables and challenges are reduced to nothing, so no, interaction is not really needed.

Compare and contrast this to say, a sov group that has to defend ratters running anomalies. Content is made for the hunters and the hunted, and the defenders - good conflict, meaningful player conflict. The opportunity cost of earning wealth this way is far more in line with a healthy risk/reward paradigm. Just like the blood raiders sites - player conflict is spurred, interesting things can happen, rather than the same boring AI doing the exact same thing.

Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Tell me again how you aren't a complete hypocrite?


Well for one, I'm not a hypocrite because I post with my main. Got a problem with me, wardec away, locator agent away, do whatever you feel you need to. I don't hide.

Second, I'm not a hypocrite because I have first hand experience here. Have you personally run incursions, DEDs, L4s, etc, in most or all different spaces in the game? Once you have done all of these things, come back and pontificate about how balanced HS incursions are, and how they don't drain New Eden of important sources of conflict, and cheapen the null and low experience by offering rewards with no opportunity cost. Somehow I am not the most inclined to take what you say at face value when it comes to what you have and have not done, or what you have or do not have first hand knowledge of.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1505 - 2015-11-28 00:36:23 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

So your solution is to nerf the one PVE content piece that REQUIRES player interaction...


No, the solution is to nerf something that can be mindlessly farmed, whose only real difficulty is in a cost barrier to the expensive ship needed to farm the site, that gives obscene levels of income for how easy and safe it is.


Not even going to point out the hypocrisy of this statement when the 40 man fleet, organized and led by a competent FC to complete these "mindless farming sites" in any sort of timely fashion as to achieve said offending amounts of isk is not much dissimilar to the mindless pvp fleets of this game, where killmails are produced by careful and diligent work of a competent FC.

So the F1 key is apparently more important if you are doing it as opposed to someone else.

Well, like I said. Elimination isn't a bad idea. I can think of far better ways of having incursions rather than sites anyways. I would prefer intelligent AI that roam and disrupt player activity myself.

Just going to leave this here: Risk Vs Reward

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1506 - 2015-11-28 00:43:59 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

Not even going to point out the hypocrisy of this statement when the 40 man fleet, organized and led by a competent FC to complete these "mindless farming sites" in any sort of timely fashion as to achieve said offending amounts of isk is not much dissimilar to the mindless pvp fleets of this game, where killmails are produced by careful and diligent work of a competent FC.



"competent FC"?

Roll

Because it really takes so much competence to broadcast target priorities?

Literally everything you carebears cry about nullsec players is 100% worse in Incursions(and don't tell me you don't constantly cry about real players, it's half your post history). You orbit the anchor, you press F1, you get a frankly absurd amount of money for it. (Nullsec combat is actually far more involved, because as it turns out, NPCs always behave the same, unlike the FC on the other side of the proverbial chessboard)

Carebears always project.

"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.

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#1507 - 2015-11-28 01:00:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Just going to leave this here: Risk Vs Reward

That's an interesting article, however increased risk doesn't lead to increased loss. It leads to increased risk management so there is no loss.

That applies in Eve just as much as it does in anything people do. No one enjoys losing a ship, so people manage their risks to be as low as possible.

The basic assumption of the article's study:

'If ratting in NS is more dangerous than missioning in HS, what we should clearly see from the data is that more ratting ships are dying in NS compared with mission ships in HS.'

is a flawed assumption.

I normally hate using RL comparisons, however risk management applies equally in game as it does in RL. In RL, if a particular occupation or work task presents a lot of hazards, we don't just accept that loss will happen and people will die, we actively manage them so the risk of death is as low as possible. A lack of loss doesn't mean the work is not dangerous. It's really no different in the game.

The study that he conducted found that:

"In these high security systems, 69 PVE ships were destroyed in this month for 4.16m NPCs killed, while only 44 PVE ships were destroyed in those 8 null sec systems, and for a mere value of 23.8b isk for the same number of NPC kills. The most common PVE ships to die in HS were tengus and marauders, while in NS the most common PVE ships to die were (by far) ishtars, gilas, and VNIs."

To me, that looks like a success in terms of nullsec risk management, not an argument that nullsec is less dangerous.

It shows both that the likelihood of losing a ship in nullsec was well managed in the systems he looked at; and that the consequences of loss in those systems was reduced as well. There's nothing bad about that at all. Nor does it mean that nullsec is inherently less dangerous than highsec.

It's equally plausible (and definitely true on a daily basis) that the people in nullsec used more ways to manage the risk than the ones in the highsec systems. The 3 comments at the bottom of the article also highlight that.

In order to understand whether nullsec is more or less dangerous than other space, a study would need to look first at the hazards that exist and then look at ways the associated risks are managed, just as we do in RL risk studies.

That's kind of the whole point of many of the positions in this thread. The risk:reward balance for incursions needs adjustment, particularly in highsec where 1.5% of the game's population accumulate between them, the third largest amount of ISK flow (not even including the LP conversion). On an individual income level, that creates disincentive to take on greater risk for equal reward.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#1508 - 2015-11-28 01:19:53 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
That's an interesting article, however increased risk doesn't lead to increased loss. It leads to increased risk management so there is no loss.


Pretty much this. Some of those systems that were cherry picked are nested in some of the most well guarded ratting pockets in the game, which are prohibitively difficult to cause mischief in. The difference is that this security is very much player made, and is part of a healthy content and opportunity costed ecosystem. Unlike incursions.

You run an incursion, you get paid. It pretty much ends there.

Someone runs an anomaly. This makes it so someone just wants to stop that person, because they can or because they believe in Gurista's rights. Then more people want to stop the guy who wants to stop someone ratting, for whatever reason motivates them. Content! New Eden is ALIVE!!! The ball continues to roll, and a healthy chain of causality fills new Eden with creation, destruction, stories and mirth.

It's a different topic entire whether null is too safe, or not safe enough. Even if I personally believe that null is absurdly safe and that content creation out there is extremely hard, at least it can be done. At least there is some appreciable cost or danger, which is infinitely better than HS incursions.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1509 - 2015-11-28 01:25:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
So, anyone want to point out to that blogger and the Alt that there is a significant difference in total population between high sec an null sec?

And that space with only about 1/6th the total population of the bigger space but with 2/3rds as many deaths is considerably more dangerous?

BTW according to the Alt he's some kind of accountant type that uses all kinds of math and stuff...
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1510 - 2015-11-28 01:30:37 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

BTW according to the Alt he's some kind of accountant type that uses all kinds of math and stuff...


I too, can lie on the internet.

"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.

Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#1511 - 2015-11-28 01:35:54 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

And bringing incursions into line with the rest of EVE would actually be a buff to high sec, because mission runners would get more value from thier LP, (because they would be less CONCORD LP converted into multi-run BPCs from LP stors the mission runners had to actually grind standings for).


What are you talking about? What proof do you have of this?
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1512 - 2015-11-28 01:38:08 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
So, anyone want to point out to that blogger and the Alt that there is a significant difference in total population between high sec an null sec. And that space with only about 1/6th the total population of the bigger space but with 2/3rds as many deaths is considerably more dangerous?

BTW according to the Alt he's some kind of accountant type that uses all kinds of math and stuff...



So you didn't read the article at all did you. It was from a year ago. The author attacked that very argument head on with the way the stats were set up. Same number of NPC kills, same amount of time, Null sec had less deaths.

Didn't you just post not 3 hours ago that what I do and where I live isn't important and didn't matter? Didn't take you long to revert back to blind hate and personal attacks did it.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1513 - 2015-11-28 01:39:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

BTW according to the Alt he's some kind of accountant type that uses all kinds of math and stuff...


I too, can lie on the internet.


That you have definitely proven.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1514 - 2015-11-28 01:41:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

Not even going to point out the hypocrisy of this statement when the 40 man fleet, organized and led by a competent FC to complete these "mindless farming sites" in any sort of timely fashion as to achieve said offending amounts of isk is not much dissimilar to the mindless pvp fleets of this game, where killmails are produced by careful and diligent work of a competent FC.



"competent FC"?

Roll

Because it really takes so much competence to broadcast target priorities?

Literally everything you carebears cry about nullsec players is 100% worse in Incursions(and don't tell me you don't constantly cry about real players, it's half your post history). You orbit the anchor, you press F1, you get a frankly absurd amount of money for it. (Nullsec combat is actually far more involved, because as it turns out, NPCs always behave the same, unlike the FC on the other side of the proverbial chessboard)

Carebears always project.

Gotta agree with Kaarous. Difference between pvp F1 monkeys and Incursion F1 monkeys is that the pvp FC is heading into an unregulated system. A competent incursion FC is only so if they can stick to the plan. A true competent fc was those of us who lead fleets into the incursion sites for the first time, in affordable ships cause we knew we would lose some. If suddenly mid site, everything turned on their heads in an incursion? Could the FC react and adapt or timely make a fall back call? Can they leave peeps behind if need be to save a greater majority? That is a good FC

I complain about nullsec myself for the other side, but it never is the FC side. A fail FC people stop flying with. The fact that in nullsec blobs rule is only a matter of proper war planning.

As for drifter incursions, is sad that the risk to isk has been so destroyed. Lack of meaningful pve means the drifter incursions are strangely deserted aside from small groups. Only activity has been when word of bugs to exploit have come up. No proper live events to get people excited, no content to get people used to having fun. What does a good FC work with in pve?

A bit of my fleet I found for another thread. Make do with what you got, and we were successful like this. We didnt know how each encounter would go, what new surprises were in store, as such, minmax and meta play were moot.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1515 - 2015-11-28 01:42:16 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

And bringing incursions into line with the rest of EVE would actually be a buff to high sec, because mission runners would get more value from thier LP, (because they would be less CONCORD LP converted into multi-run BPCs from LP stors the mission runners had to actually grind standings for).


What are you talking about? What proof do you have of this?


Typo, I said would, I meant Could. Unlike some, I'm willing to admit that I don't have a crystal ball. However in my experience, fewer people using an LP store filled with items people want increases the value of LP.

Incursion runners have access to EVERY LP store at negligible cost, unlike mission runners whose access depends on standings.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1516 - 2015-11-28 01:42:24 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

BTW according to the Alt he's some kind of accountant type that uses all kinds of math and stuff...


I too, can lie on the internet.


That you have definitely proven.


Whoosh.

"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.

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#1517 - 2015-11-28 01:46:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
So you didn't read the article at all did you. It was from a year ago. The author attacked that very argument head on with the way the stats were set up. Same number of NPC kills, same amount of time, Null sec had less deaths.

It's very easy to produce something that looks convincing on the surface, but that is driven by bias to prove a point that has already been concluded.

That particular study has some pretty major shortcomings, on top of it's flawed basis to begin with.

It's unfortunate because it would be great if he'd taken a more serious and measured approach to the design of his analysis. That would have produced something of value to us all.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1518 - 2015-11-28 01:50:08 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:

Gotta agree with Kaarous. Difference between pvp F1 monkeys and Incursion F1 monkeys is that the pvp FC is heading into an unregulated system. A competent incursion FC is only so if they can stick to the plan.


Somewhat.

The major difference between the two is that the nullsec FC has an actual adversary, not just highly predictable NPCs that have had their behavior mapped out for years.

The lesson to be learned here is that PvP and PvE are not comparable. The only difficulty inherent in PvE content in and of itself is derived from ignorance.(or procedural generation, something I doubt CCP's servers can handle) Otherwise, PvE's major difficulty factor is completely derived from the actions of other players.

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1519 - 2015-11-28 02:03:40 UTC
And before Chimpy McStrawman pops in again, I'll point out one more thing.

I am not saying that pushing F1 is any harder in nullsec than it is in highsec.

What I am saying however, is that the POTENTIAL for complexity, unforeseen events, and thereby inherent difficulty, is far higher in any PvP interaction than it is in any PvE interaction. Because you have an actual adversary to contend with, not just a computer script.

The only potential for those things in PvE comes from ignorance of the content you are doing, or from other players turning it into a PvP interaction.

"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.

Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#1520 - 2015-11-28 02:10:48 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
nerfing it will cause nullsec players to not bother with them and the people who really want to do them will have more chance and less waiting, whats the issue?



Hmm, a good point, but the problem is how badly you null players want them nerfed. And if they do get nerfed, will something else in hi-sec get targeted?