These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Closing incursions by killing the Mothership

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dzajic
#201 - 2012-01-22 14:14:25 UTC
Yes VGs need tweaking. I will not deny that. Only one class of sites out of 4 being worth doing is broken content.
Though nothing is said to be as broken, and especially destroying the game, as you claim.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#202 - 2012-01-22 14:27:39 UTC
Fronkfurter McSheebleton wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Really? The incursion community couldn't muster a few dozen PVP ships to group up and wardec us? It's not that they lack numbers, it's that they lack the will (or maybe the courage) to actually do it.

The consistency, sir. The organization that is enjoyed by having everyone in a single alliance with(more or less) the same goals. That is what they lack. It's not just one group of people...


But we're not a single alliance, either. We're a coalition of three groups, with a few other people who are along for the fun.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#203 - 2012-01-22 15:06:38 UTC
i really don't get all this hate about incursions; at least ppl are "working" for they're isk, not booting like some of the 0.0 "ellite pvpers" do...

also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining; getting a PASSIVE income of several trillions isk/month ,now that is something worth of being fixed, not john doe doind 2-3 hundred millions/day. Smile
XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#204 - 2012-01-22 15:21:32 UTC
gascanu wrote:
i really don't get all this hate about incursions; at least ppl are "working" for they're isk, not booting like some of the 0.0 "ellite pvpers" do...

also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining; getting a PASSIVE income of several trillions isk/month ,now that is something worth of being fixed, not john doe doind 2-3 hundred millions/day. Smile


haha you think incursions are work

also confirming no effort goes in to claiming moons, they just sort of fall into the laps of their owners
fuer0n
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#205 - 2012-01-22 16:24:49 UTC
gascanu wrote:
i really don't get all this hate about incursions; at least ppl are "working" for they're isk, not booting like some of the 0.0 "ellite pvpers" do...

also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining; getting a PASSIVE income of several trillions isk/month ,now that is something worth of being fixed, not john doe doind 2-3 hundred millions/day. Smile


exactly, don't see some of the csm bitching about that though do we.
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
#206 - 2012-01-22 17:37:37 UTC
fuer0n wrote:
gascanu wrote:
i really don't get all this hate about incursions; at least ppl are "working" for they're isk, not booting like some of the 0.0 "ellite pvpers" do...

also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining; getting a PASSIVE income of several trillions isk/month ,now that is something worth of being fixed, not john doe doind 2-3 hundred millions/day. Smile


exactly, don't see some of the csm bitching about that though do we.


You mean aside from the parts where:

Quote:
The CSM spoke critically of the technetium bottleneck and the need to rebalance moon income. The CSM noted that alliance income should be tied more closely to actually possessing territory rather than sov-independent income sources like moons.

and

Quote:
The CSM stated that a sovholding alliance’s primary income should stem from the territory itself, such as the taxation of line member’s ratting income or Planetary Interaction, rather than from sovless income sources such as moons. The CSM noted that there is too much emphasis on moons, particularly technetium, as a source of alliance income.

So anyway, you are incredibly bad at the internet.
Katherine Starlight
Doomheim
#207 - 2012-01-22 17:38:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Katherine Starlight
incursions are decreasing the value of ISK, which is something CSM and CCP are striving towards.
they are all politician, they force **** down your throat and you love it because you don't know any better than believing their lies when the true objective is their own profit from your loss, But then again some people want to live in totalitarian dictatorship.

CSM is NOT the voice of EVE players, they are just random people up in their own ego thinking they are important.

Team BFF was the voice of the EVE players.


Highsec does not need an infinite isk-farm.
XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#208 - 2012-01-22 18:07:25 UTC  |  Edited by: XXSketchxx
Katherine Starlight wrote:


CSM is NOT the voice of EVE players, they are just random people up in their own ego thinking they are important.


You're literally an idiot that doesn't know what democracy is.

If you want the CSM to represent your voice, organize people to vote for someone you support hurrrrrrrr
XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#209 - 2012-01-22 18:10:10 UTC
Ispia Jaydrath wrote:
fuer0n wrote:
gascanu wrote:
i really don't get all this hate about incursions; at least ppl are "working" for they're isk, not booting like some of the 0.0 "ellite pvpers" do...

also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining; getting a PASSIVE income of several trillions isk/month ,now that is something worth of being fixed, not john doe doind 2-3 hundred millions/day. Smile


exactly, don't see some of the csm bitching about that though do we.


You mean aside from the parts where:

Quote:
The CSM spoke critically of the technetium bottleneck and the need to rebalance moon income. The CSM noted that alliance income should be tied more closely to actually possessing territory rather than sov-independent income sources like moons.

and

Quote:
The CSM stated that a sovholding alliance’s primary income should stem from the territory itself, such as the taxation of line member’s ratting income or Planetary Interaction, rather than from sovless income sources such as moons. The CSM noted that there is too much emphasis on moons, particularly technetium, as a source of alliance income.

So anyway, you are incredibly bad at the internet.


Don't you know anything? High sec pubbies can't read.
Spineker
#210 - 2012-01-22 19:47:24 UTC
Democracy in Eve? WTF that is stupid to even pretend it.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#211 - 2012-01-22 20:02:53 UTC
gascanu wrote:
also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining

Moons, of any type, do not create ISK. In fact, mining them is an ISK sink (removes ISK from the game) when you consider taxation on the sale of the technetium.

"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,

Niko Takahashi
Yoshitomi Group
#212 - 2012-01-22 23:07:03 UTC
Roxwar wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Roxwar wrote:


Maybe i dont see the bigger picture so only commenting on what i gleen from these forums, but what effect does it have on your experience of playing eve, your game, that high sec players are farming a particular event and earning lots of isk?



The bigger picture is this: despite low and 0.0 sec incursions nominally pay out better, low sec and 0.0 players come to hi sec (or jump clone to hi sec) to farm hi sec incursions.

Even former rich WH players abandon WHs to switch into doing hi sec incursions.


Now, the reasons are many but I suppose the main one is this:

Low sec and 0.0 incursions pay more but must be done on far worse ships and T2 fittings therefore they end up being done at more risk and MUCH less efficiency than high sec ones. Therefore the low sec / 0.0 dwellers do their math and all come to hi sec. Furthermore, unlike hi sec, the more you stay at a given site, the exponentially higher the probability of being found by aggressors.

This automagically promotes hi sec incursions as THE way to farm ISK. Expecially when made not to end.
In the past, this happened for other game features (i.e. L4) and CCP used some hard nerfs, multiple times.


Ahh, now i see more clearly.

But using that very same logic, Darius is actually not only messing with high sec playes, but WH/Low/Null players all at the same time yes? So basically in effect, he's alienating 99% of the EVE player base in doing what he's doing?

Way to get yourself re-elected for CSM Shocked

I have to ask ( excuse the noobism here ) but from reading the forums, does being a CSM member require you to be a complete douche most of the time and make a point of ruining everybody elses game just because their idea of fun differ's from your own?
Seems thats the general concensus from here regarding people such as The Mittani and Darius and the actions they've taken and the way in which they managed to get the actual owners to change the game mechanics in certain regards to suit their own ideals as to how THEY think the game should work.



Well pretty much CSM and 75% of null are full of people like that. There are few wxception to this rule but most of them are like that.
Spineker
#213 - 2012-01-22 23:46:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
Suppose they killed all the MoMs today.

Do they pop up somewhere else after the MoM death or is that it for today?


Maybe if they stopped the respawn and had them pop up somewhere else it would stop the drama. It is the farming that people are up in arms about not incursions themselves or that is how I see it anyway.
Kaanchana
Tax-haven
#214 - 2012-01-23 00:59:27 UTC
Spineker wrote:
Suppose they killed all the MoMs today.

Do they pop up somewhere else after the MoM death or is that it for today?


Maybe if they stopped the respawn and had them pop up somewhere else it would stop the drama. It is the farming that people are up in arms about not incursions themselves or that is how I see it anyway.


AFAIK they don't pop up again. Once u kill the mom, it means that incursion is over and the next one will spawn at a random area and at a random time. Its definitely not like running anoms in 0.0 Big smile
Dino Boff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2012-01-23 01:52:00 UTC
Spineker wrote:
Suppose they killed all the MoMs today.


They are actually dead, thanks to Krissada's fleet and with BTL/DTL's help. 3 New incursions should show up in the next 24-48 hours.
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
#216 - 2012-01-23 07:17:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Super Whopper
Katherine Starlight wrote:
incursions are decreasing the value of ISK, which is something CSM and CCP are striving towards.
they are all politician, they force **** down your throat and you love it because you don't know any better than believing their lies when the true objective is their own profit from your loss, But then again some people want to live in totalitarian dictatorship.

CSM is NOT the voice of EVE players, they are just random people up in their own ego thinking they are important.

Team BFF was the voice of the EVE players.


Highsec does not need an infinite isk-farm.


Basically. If you read the latest CSM report you'll see it's by Tech moon holders for Tech moon holders. It's all about keeping power in the hands of the few at the expense of the rest.

XXSketchxx wrote:
You're literally an idiot that doesn't know what democracy is.


HAHAHAHA, the irony of this post! Not only don't you know what democracy is by thinking the CSM is some form of democracy, you also think it exists in EVE.

You really are terrible at poasting.
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#217 - 2012-01-23 07:23:23 UTC  |  Edited by: gascanu
XXSketchxx wrote:
gascanu wrote:
i really don't get all this hate about incursions; at least ppl are "working" for they're isk, not booting like some of the 0.0 "ellite pvpers" do...

also speaking about "too much isk" : that's a tiny bit from what some large alliance are getting from moon mining; getting a PASSIVE income of several trillions isk/month ,now that is something worth of being fixed, not john doe doind 2-3 hundred millions/day. Smile


haha you think incursions are work

also confirming no effort goes in to claiming moons, they just sort of fall into the laps of their owners



haha you think that warping a carrier in anomalies is work.... Shocked

also confirming that joining a HUGE napfest to get/keep moons is effort

p.s: i also think that farming anomalies with titans/supers is hard work. Big smile
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
#218 - 2012-01-23 07:30:59 UTC
Ispia Jaydrath wrote:
You mean aside from the parts where:

Quote:
The CSM spoke critically of the technetium bottleneck and the need to rebalance moon income. The CSM noted that alliance income should be tied more closely to actually possessing territory rather than sov-independent income sources like moons.

and

Quote:
The CSM stated that a sovholding alliance’s primary income should stem from the territory itself, such as the taxation of line member’s ratting income or Planetary Interaction, rather than from sovless income sources such as moons. The CSM noted that there is too much emphasis on moons, particularly technetium, as a source of alliance income.

So anyway, you are incredibly bad at the internet.


And this part
Quote:
The CSM proposed adding R32 Alchemy as a possible fix for the Technetium bottleneck.


NOOOOOOOOO, dun nerf our Tech moonz Cry
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#219 - 2012-01-23 10:56:29 UTC
gascanu wrote:
haha you think that warping a carrier in anomalies is work.... Shocked

also confirming that joining a HUGE napfest to get/keep moons is effort

p.s: i also think that farming anomalies with titans/supers is hard work. Big smile


Confirming taking sov and setting up intel channels happens by itself, and cannot be threatened by other alliances.

Also, a "non invasion pact" does not mean "do not shoot my ratting Nyx pact" since, you know, that's exactly what happens.

Non-invasion pacts are nearly exclusively due to the :effort: involved in sov mechanics and nothing to do with a desire to not shoot or be shot at.

"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,

XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#220 - 2012-01-23 13:05:38 UTC
Super Whopper wrote:


XXSketchxx wrote:
You're literally an idiot that doesn't know what democracy is.


HAHAHAHA, the irony of this post! Not only don't you know what democracy is by thinking the CSM is some form of democracy, you also think it exists in EVE.

You really are terrible at poasting.


You might want to look up the word "irony"

Because you're using it wrong.