These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Srsly, something has to be done about incursions.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Argus Eritaramis
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#181 - 2012-01-11 20:39:03 UTC
^ this!
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#182 - 2012-01-11 20:48:00 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Which nullbear empire does Trebor represent? His alliance is based in W-space I believe.


I have two main characters. Trebor is currently the evil Dirt Nap boys gank people in nullsec (they also run a lot of lowsec incursions), and my other main is an industrial character in a wormhole-based corp.

I have tried many different playstyles in my EVE career, including sov and non-sov nullsec. They all have their charms -- and annoyances, which is why I ran for CSM in the first place.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Endeavour Starfleet
#183 - 2012-01-11 20:58:12 UTC
So can we get some clarification on the "tad" part? What exactly is the CSM asking for as far as any changes to Vanguards? Will they consider removing the ability to blitz while keeping the nonshiny fleets with the payout they are used to?
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2012-01-11 21:44:12 UTC
Hainnz wrote:
I don't care about incursions one way or the other, but thinking about it, this game lives and dies with High Sec. If you squeeze players out of High Sec, you are more likely to squeeze them out of the game and not into low or hull sec.

IMO, make High Sec more fun, not less. A better game experience in High Sec means more people playing this game which in turn means more people out in Low and Null blowing each other up.


A very fair point, and not one anyone with any sense of reason can object. I have a hard time making the push to null myself, so while it's a lesser version, it's still has similarities. In short, I hear you.

Still, I don't think this means vanguards should be paying 8 digits an hour to hundreds of players on a daily basis. Highsec mission-running was already lucrative. Sure, it would take a week or two to get that shiny, faction-fitted Machariel, but you knew it was coming if you knew what you were doing. Now, with incursions, it takes maybe 2-3 days. That's an alarming disparity if you ask me, and one which should rest solely with the people who are located in areas from which Machariels and the like are obtained.

As far as alliances owning nullsec and paying their mortgages from monopolizing sources of ISK within their borders: where exactly do you think the incursion money is going when you drop your 8 billion ISK wallet on shiny officer mods and slap them onto your 3 week old vindi? Maybe RMT is a problem. Maybe nullsec risk-vs-reward needs some work. But don't blindly whine about the very thing you are supporting through your own vanity.

Also, it's just a game. <3 Big smile
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2012-01-11 21:56:18 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're in the process of scheduling some developer time to review the Incursion content, and make adjustments as needed. We've got a stack of feedback from the CSM, and we'll hopefully be blogging about it in the near future.

Thanks,
-Greyscale

Awesome. Hopefully scheduled for January and not July. :)
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#186 - 2012-01-11 22:03:04 UTC
Hainnz wrote:
I don't care about incursions one way or the other, but thinking about it, this game lives and dies with High Sec. If you squeeze players out of High Sec, you are more likely to squeeze them out of the game and not into low or hull sec.

IMO, make High Sec more fun, not less. A better game experience in High Sec means more people playing this game which in turn means more people out in Low and Null blowing each other up.


I agree, and here is how to make high sec more fun...

1. Remove Concord
2. Remove invulnerability to wardecs
4. Reduce income per hour from incursions to 30% of present figures
3. Add more exploration type content

suitably beef up rewards in low sec to match the new fun available in high-sec.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)
Muammar al-Amarr
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#187 - 2012-01-11 23:10:50 UTC
Hainnz wrote:
I don't care about incursions one way or the other, but thinking about it, this game lives and dies with High Sec. If you squeeze players out of High Sec, you are more likely to squeeze them out of the game and not into low or hull sec.

IMO, make High Sec more fun, not less. A better game experience in High Sec means more people playing this game which in turn means more people out in Low and Null blowing each other up.

Which is why hisec needs more stuff to do for solo players - more exploriation, more missions, more storylines. Not endless incursion grindan which also happens to make more isk/hr than any other hs activity.

With more carebears joining the game to populate hisec, more would ultimately try their hand at pvp. Anf if nothing else, thered be more target for suicide gankers to blow up.
Toriessian
Helion Production Labs
Independent Operators Consortium
#188 - 2012-01-12 00:40:40 UTC
I think the payout can be slightly reduced without actually nerfing the ISK per site:

1) Make 2-3 different possible spawns for each wave at a site. Mix up ship types. No more lol NCO legion blitz
2) Make it so that all ships at a site have to be cleared before you get a payout. No more lol shiny shield OTA blitz

For extra lol:
3) Give the eyesturs and renyn a % chance to fire off a TD. Might make missile ships a little less lol for incursions but I won't hold my breath. At the very least these ships will be upgraded from annoying ignore to annoying kill.

4) If the mothership is out each site could have a %chance spawn a high alpha bomber wave at a random time during the site? Would require MOM to take longer to appear to be feasible.


Every day I'm wafflin!
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#189 - 2012-01-12 01:29:46 UTC
Good christ the stupid is strong in here.

Given that the Mittani has stated that he personally likes Incursions, and thinks they pay the right amount in highsec, exactly WHERE is your "OMG OMG TEH CSM ARE NULLSEC AND WANT TO NERF HIGHSEC!!" ******* horseshit coming from?

Oh, right, out of your reactionary assholes again.

To save time, here are some cut'n'paste arguments you can post all over the forums:

1) I am right because the voting was unfair, despite the fact I didn't vote. Yay apathy and entitlement! ^_^
2) I am right because leaders in 0.0 alliances all RMT the alliances ISK, despite me not stopping for 2seconds to think how unlikely this is (HINT: RMT income comes from personally held bots. HINT HINT: these are running in highsec, mostly)
3) I don't understand basic economy, and somehow think Tech moons actually produce ISK.
4) Nullsec is full of carebears and no risk, but I can't go there because OH WAIT I WILL THINK OF A REASON LATER
5) This is an MMO ... why does it reward people who work together for a common goal? NO MUM I DON'T NEED MY PANTS WASHING TODAY

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#190 - 2012-01-12 01:41:49 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:

Seriously CCP you have to understand. The nullsec alliances HATE incursions. Incursions compete with their vision of complete control over their members. Forced CTAs, No incentive to share moon goo, No incentive to treat new members as anything but dirt and cannon fodder.

Look at many alliances alliance mail. You will notice this phrase in many different ways "This is a mandatory CTA join or log off"


What forces people to stay in alliances who treat them like dirt and cannon fodder?

If they are so stupid to accept that, then they have only to blame themselves not the ebil alliance.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Endeavour Starfleet
#191 - 2012-01-12 02:18:48 UTC
And go where.

Lets say you join alliance A because the corp you are going into sounded good or had a friend of yours in it. You get treated like dirt and decide to leave.

You go talk to alliance B. They are blue to A but think you got kicked for a bad reason and treat you as a spy.

You go talk to alliance C. You discover alliance A is hated all over the place and they reject you on sight.

Alliance D wont take you without full API..

On and on and on.

It is not that easy to just leave.
ASadOldGit
Doomheim
#192 - 2012-01-12 02:31:08 UTC  |  Edited by: ASadOldGit
Lady Spank wrote:
[...]

I agree, and here is how to make high sec more fun...

1. Remove Concord
2. Remove invulnerability to wardecs
4. Reduce income per hour from incursions to 30% of present figures
3. Add more exploration type content

suitably beef up rewards in low sec to match the new fun available in high-sec.


I love point 3 (exploration), but, if 1 and 2 are done, wouldn't everyone abandon (or at least, feel they have to) their industrials and fly around in PvP-fitted combat ships?
It would certainly make EVE more "fun", but who's collecting the minerals to make all these ships?

This signature intentionally left blank for you to fill in at your leisure.
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#193 - 2012-01-12 09:09:36 UTC
Jalmari Huitsikko wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:

We're not all in big alliances. And we certainly don't want to get rid of incursions.

Incursions are a great collaborative PvE experience, it brings people together in highsec (which is a good thing), gives some focus points where pvp can happen in lowsec as well as providing some much needed reward boost there, etc. So, no, we don't want to get rid of Incursions, they are a good thing.

The questions that need to be looked at as far as I'm concerned are:
- whether there are enough incursions or not. I believe they go away too fast in highsec, forcing continuous migration which isn't a good thing
- whether the overall rewards are appropriate. I believe the rewards are a tad too high in highsec, and fairly good otherwise, a bit on the low side in 0.0 but 0.0 has other income sources (or should have).
- whether sites are balanced (they're not, vanguards are too easy to do, the other sites are too annoying/long), diversity is good in terms of content, but the overall reward/time could use some harmonization.

If anything, we asked for more similar content, because it generates the kind of behavior (people getting together) and fun experience/gameplay that is beneficial to the game, so stop worrying :p


- Incursions go way too fast? People can farm them for days, which is very likely one problem. Migration is a good thing. Like Ooooh STARGATE and FLYING IN SPACE.

Otherwise I've been doing some incursions and getting up fleets that's not easy **** (for proper gang) and takes time. That's why bigger sites need oomph. Getting a bigger fleet running is much more difficult. VG fleet is still reasonably small and easier to get running without too much planning and spamming. Not to mention VG sites are pretty straightforward close to medium range "fights". VG's are good money but not so good I'd go decrease rewards much.

Instead of going nerf all hi sec **** I'd go boosting more difficult sites and low sec especially. 0.0 is controlled by alliances which already have their isk prints they don't especially need more goodies there. Well, at least not in form of incursions. 0.0 needs other **** to make it rewarding to gather corporations, alliances and actually taking effort to siege systems for months and stuff. All that crap does not reward anyone much, especially normal cannon fodder which is actually just paying isk to fund ships and then he pays taxes to corp for ratting and then he pays taxes at stations for refining and market. Pay pay pay pay pay pay pay.



At the rate people are doing the incursions in highsec, they do go away too fast. They can farm them for days in lowsec and 0.0, but not so in highsec. Migration is a good thing, but not when people are required to move like ants whose nest is being continuously kicked. Balance...

You mention getting fleets is not easy, I concur, hence why I think incursions need to stay up a bit longer so people have more time to set up, find friends, move there.
Vanguard give good money, and for most normal fleet, that's fine. The issue is when people find ways to blitz them, the reward/time goes way up then. That's the issue I'm talking about. The other sites need to be balanced upwards.

Lowsec sites are good money for the time spent, I don't think they need a buff or nerf at all.
0.0 having "isk print" is both true and not, but that's not the subject of the discussion here. As far as I'm concerned, 0.0 needs more "grunt level" isk sources and less "alliance level" ones, and incursions play into that so I don't advocate changing anything on that front.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
Planetary Genocide
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#194 - 2012-01-12 10:48:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Planetary Genocide
The amount of stupid in this thread is staggering.

No, guys, the devs aren't looking at Incursions because the CSM is an evil null alliance conspiracy that wants to make the game enjoyable only for themselves, the devs are looking at Incursions because they're not working as ******* intended. I don't think CCP wanted everyone to min/max isk/time on the ******* Vanguard sites over and over again; if they did, they wouldn't have made Assaults or HQ's. We're sorry that your isk printing machine has the possibility of getting nerfed, but you just need to deal with it and come to terms with the fact that it's not supposed to be that easy.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#195 - 2012-01-12 10:58:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
Planetary Genocide wrote:
The amount of stupid in this thread is staggering.

No, guys, the devs aren't looking at Incursions because the CSM is an evil null alliance conspiracy that wants to make the game enjoyable only for themselves, the devs are looking at Incursions because they're not working as ******* intended. I don't think CCP wanted everyone to min/max isk/time on the ******* Vanguard sites over and over again; if they did, they wouldn't have made Assaults or HQ's. We're sorry that your isk printing machine has the possibility of getting nerfed, but you just need to deal with it and come to terms with the fact that it's not supposed to be that easy.


but who believes in official stories anymore .. Big smileBig smileBig smile
Its much more refreshing to think that you and you alone posses the knowledge nobody else have and you finally figured all out.
Vae Abeo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#196 - 2012-01-12 11:11:22 UTC
Ill be honest here ccp asked for feedback and Ill give them just that.
You know what isnt fun? ginding for isk no matter the reason its just boring (seriously grind 4's)
You know what is pretty fun? Forcing ppl to fleet up be social and stilll make isk sure its a good payout but are you seriously complaining? I mean sometimes I would like to afford more than a rifter. Competitions are pretty fun even if you lose them, Incursions are a great way to keep people interacting with each other. To the people who are mad (haters gunna hate) TRY IT. Seriously get a casual fleet learn targets an shoot the breeze on mumble or wherever you dont even have to be hardcore all the time (stfu noob l2p) Eve is about the community and the people in it. Im pretty happy with how they are but if they need to be looked at CCP please take your time (pos fuel rushed sound familiar?) Crucible was good it made me actually want to log in.
Mata1s
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#197 - 2012-01-12 11:24:34 UTC
Thread is full of QQing high-sec carebears crying that their low risk high reward isk farms are gonna get balanced.

How can you not understand that Null-sec should be more profitable?

Risk vs Reward.
Endeavour Starfleet
#198 - 2012-01-12 11:33:06 UTC
Quote:
At the rate people are doing the incursions in highsec, they do go away too fast. They can farm them for days in lowsec and 0.0, but not so in highsec. Migration is a good thing, but not when people are required to move like ants whose nest is being continuously kicked. Balance...

You mention getting fleets is not easy, I concur, hence why I think incursions need to stay up a bit longer so people have more time to set up, find friends, move there.
Vanguard give good money, and for most normal fleet, that's fine. The issue is when people find ways to blitz them, the reward/time goes way up then. That's the issue I'm talking about. The other sites need to be balanced upwards.

Lowsec sites are good money for the time spent, I don't think they need a buff or nerf at all.
0.0 having "isk print" is both true and not, but that's not the subject of the discussion here. As far as I'm concerned, 0.0 needs more "grunt level" isk sources and less "alliance level" ones, and incursions play into that so I don't advocate changing anything on that front.


So let us clarify. The ONLY change you want for vanguards is to require the same effort from a shiny fleet as a normal fleet right? No cuts to payout or LP or the other insane changes people who have never been in incursions are calling for? (such as reduced site spawn rate or concord free or moving to nullsec)

I do have to admit it is not very fair for shiny fleets to not have to shoot everything to clear it.
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#199 - 2012-01-12 12:05:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Meissa Anunthiel
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Quote:
At the rate people are doing the incursions in highsec, they do go away too fast. They can farm them for days in lowsec and 0.0, but not so in highsec. Migration is a good thing, but not when people are required to move like ants whose nest is being continuously kicked. Balance...

You mention getting fleets is not easy, I concur, hence why I think incursions need to stay up a bit longer so people have more time to set up, find friends, move there.
Vanguard give good money, and for most normal fleet, that's fine. The issue is when people find ways to blitz them, the reward/time goes way up then. That's the issue I'm talking about. The other sites need to be balanced upwards.

Lowsec sites are good money for the time spent, I don't think they need a buff or nerf at all.
0.0 having "isk print" is both true and not, but that's not the subject of the discussion here. As far as I'm concerned, 0.0 needs more "grunt level" isk sources and less "alliance level" ones, and incursions play into that so I don't advocate changing anything on that front.


So let us clarify. The ONLY change you want for vanguards is to require the same effort from a shiny fleet as a normal fleet right? No cuts to payout or LP or the other insane changes people who have never been in incursions are calling for? (such as reduced site spawn rate or concord free or moving to nullsec)

I do have to admit it is not very fair for shiny fleets to not have to shoot everything to clear it.


No, the changes I'd like are:
- Vanguards to be non-blitzable. If you want to use shiny fleets, do so, they'll provide more safety and most likely efficiency over non-shiny but overall this will lengthen the time it takes to complete them to people who blitz them and get the income/hour to reasonable levels. People who don't blitz them ideally shouldn't see an impact on their hourly income.
- I'd like non-vangard sites to be reevaluated in terms of gain/time. Either by decreasing the time, increasing the rewards or a combination thereof. Variations in terms of difficulty are fine, it's just the payout/time I'd like streamlined.
- I'd like incursions to take longer to reach 100% in highsec, probably by a factor 1.5 to 2, so more casual type of people can participate in incursions instead of seeing them despawn by the time they get on site. This, combined with decent profitability for the other sites means more people can participate.

Also, but not in the "balancing" category per se, I'd like to see more types of incurions, other races than sansha or more sansha content, I'll leave that to the content guys at CCP to decide, but more content that encourages the type of gameplay we've seen here and was previously absent from highsec. Ideally that content would be accompanied by "story" events like we've seen with sansha, in order to get the storyline evolving again and give the RPers some much-needed "fuel".

As far as incursions in low/null are concerned, I don't want any change at all for the time being.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#200 - 2012-01-12 12:08:42 UTC
When I first heard how much those Incursion people make per hour, my jaw dropped right on the ******* floor. How is this balanced? I have run missions, which paid out 30-40 tops, I have run complexes, which erratically would grant me a couple hundred million every fifth or sixth instance with as much as squat in the others, I have run anomalies and they were NOWHERE near as profitable as these HIGHSEC incursions. Why is it that people are crying about the impending nerf to their ISK printing machine? Surely you yourself can understand that having two to three times the profit per hour for something as safe as running incursions (don't tell me about risk, any fleet who can broadcast and rep adequately enough is sure to never lose a single ship) in ******* high security space is something that needs looked at?