These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Incursion fixes/feedback thread

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
El Geo
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#401 - 2012-02-16 21:37:06 UTC  |  Edited by: El Geo
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Ok lets get this clear.

Making any changes to sec status within a hisec incursion will mean said system simply WONT be used. You drooling for high priced targets will just ruin your keyboard and wont result in anything meaningful.

Instead of trying to harm incursion runners yet again the encouragement needs to be on more assault and HQ fleets.

-Force complete vanguards
- Increase Payout for assaults and HQs

Simple and done.



currently incursions only spawn in either a highsec/lowsec or nullsec constellation, they dont spawn in mixed constellations - its not about "shiny targets", nor is it about "nuking incursions from orbit", just a simple incursions spawn anywhere rather than sticking to non-mixed constellations making it much more open for everyone involved as it would spread incursions more accross diferent factions space, the highsec runners would still have the CHOICE to stay in highsec and run THE SAME sites they already run but the more risk orientated might decide they want their fleet to run vanguards in the one lowsec system becuase no one else is (among more oppertunities for everyone) - what are you soo scared of?

your whole thing seems to be "QQ NOOOO, DO NOTHING TO INCURSIONS BUT MAKE THEM EASIER AND PAY MORE!!!"

CDIA Based overlay resource for After Effects 6

Eve pathfinders Youtube
Endeavour Starfleet
#402 - 2012-02-17 01:47:14 UTC
I can now see where you are going with that. Yet I still think its rather useless as the lows and nulls arent really being run much anyway.

And a hotdrop will still reduce your incursion fleet to rubble in no time flat.
El Geo
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#403 - 2012-02-17 07:37:53 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet
#404 - 2012-02-17 07:55:17 UTC
El Geo wrote:
cant hotdrop into incursion areas


Never post while tired P Ill concede that point

Still think they won't get used much.
El Geo
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#405 - 2012-02-17 08:31:16 UTC  |  Edited by: El Geo
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
El Geo wrote:
cant hotdrop into incursion areas


Never post while tired P Ill concede that point

Still think they won't get used much.


aye, no doubt but then who can complain about it being unfair when theres incursion systems not being ran and no 'shiny' targets in lowsec , not like the 'choice' would'nt be there

a good (armor) incursion gang can be fit for pvp and would provide more than just some shiny targets, an experienced pvp gang running incursions would be more than most 'pirates' could handle, especially when going up in numbers as they do for assualts and hq's

CDIA Based overlay resource for After Effects 6

Eve pathfinders Youtube
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#406 - 2012-02-17 16:55:11 UTC
So Endeavour where lies in the difference between reducing reward payouts in vanguards vs. making vanguard sites take longer so the payout is reduced?

In order to "lower Isk/hour so enough _shiny_ people go do assault and HQ's" would mean vanguards with an almost perfect fleet should make no more than 60 m/hour.
This would mean that either:

1. Vanguard payouts are reduced by a factor of just below 3.
2. Vanguard sites are prolonged by a factor of just below 3.

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Endeavour Starfleet
#407 - 2012-02-17 20:08:22 UTC
Time between sites Traitor.

Between sites there is almost always downtime. Its better to have a few more spawns (Facor of 3 wut?) than reduce payout.
Endeavour Starfleet
#408 - 2012-02-17 20:13:16 UTC
El Geo wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
El Geo wrote:
cant hotdrop into incursion areas


Never post while tired P Ill concede that point

Still think they won't get used much.


aye, no doubt but then who can complain about it being unfair when theres incursion systems not being ran and no 'shiny' targets in lowsec , not like the 'choice' would'nt be there

a good (armor) incursion gang can be fit for pvp and would provide more than just some shiny targets, an experienced pvp gang running incursions would be more than most 'pirates' could handle, especially when going up in numbers as they do for assualts and hq's



Armor rarely can get the numbers to run those sites with current systems much less getting them to go into nullsec. Vanguards. Maybe but Assaults and HQs are more community missioning than serious money making. (Many of those runners will refuse to go into VG fleets even tho they have shiny ships that will make more isk/hr)

At most they should be assaults and VGs. The HQ should stay in hisec so the good community fleets don't get changed.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#409 - 2012-02-17 21:21:26 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Time between sites Traitor.

Between sites there is almost always downtime. Its better to have a few more spawns (Facor of 3 wut?) than reduce payout.



Implying an almost perfect fleet setup in very good condition equal 14-15 sites an hour at about 150 m an hour.
You implying headquarters and assaults being more rewarding than vanguards -> vanguard should not payout more than 60 m.

150 vs. 60, almost a factor of 3.

This with an almost perfect fleet setup. T1 fleets will linger at about 30-40 m an hour for vanguards.
Way to go Endeavour, "nuke incursions from orbit" I believe you call it?
Endeavour Starfleet
#410 - 2012-02-18 00:11:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
#1 150M an hour is bogus. Rare at best

#2 I want Assaults and Hqs buffed in payout. To help draw in more vangaurd runners. That stops the 3x right there.

#3 Vanguards are their own style and I dont want them nuked. Just reduced in sheer draw. The downtime and other factors affecting other sites should not affect Vanguard payout. A force complete on VG sites and a few extra spawns (Maybe bigger ones so its not insta 6x web and point and poof) will help draw a few out but 3x reduction is just silly. Especially with its the other sites that need buffing.

#4 You are still a traitor and you still can't explain why you ran fake logis to gank fleets with your so called shut down incursion operation to get attention betrayal.
El Geo
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#411 - 2012-02-18 04:07:36 UTC
sometimes i wonder why there are no minions, loyals and true sansha's in incursions

CDIA Based overlay resource for After Effects 6

Eve pathfinders Youtube
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#412 - 2012-02-18 09:46:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Xorv
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Additionally, if you have any especially well thought-out feedback about the feature as a whole, and particularly about specific things you feel are wrong with the current implementation, go ahead and share those too!


Specific things that are wrong with Incursions:

* There's no means for players to side with the Sansha.

* High Sec Incursions are just wrong on a number of fundamental levels.
- They throw Risk vs Reward balance out the window.
- They make no sense in terms of Lore/RP. Why is CONCORD there to protect pod pilots yet unable to repel the Sansha?

Suggestions:

* Either remove Incursions from High Sec or remove CONCORD from High Sec systems for the duration of the Incursion.

* Make player standings effect Pirate NPCs reactions, allowing those with good standings to the Sansha to fight side by side with the NPCs. No artificial rewards are necessary, potential loot from destroyed Pod pilots attempting to defeat the Sansha would be sufficient.


Ideally you would scrap Incursions as they are now altogether, and remake it into something that enhances the story of EVE and fits into a game that is supposedly a player conflict driven Sandbox MMORPG. What you have now belongs in a PvE driven Themepark MMORPG and is inappropriate for a game like EVE.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#413 - 2012-02-18 16:25:03 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
#1 150M an hour is bogus. Rare at best

#2 I want Assaults and Hqs buffed in payout. To help draw in more vangaurd runners. That stops the 3x right there.

#3 Vanguards are their own style and I dont want them nuked. Just reduced in sheer draw. The downtime and other factors affecting other sites should not affect Vanguard payout. A force complete on VG sites and a few extra spawns (Maybe bigger ones so its not insta 6x web and point and poof) will help draw a few out but 3x reduction is just silly. Especially with its the other sites that need buffing.

#4 You are still a traitor and you still can't explain why you ran fake logis to gank fleets with your so called shut down incursion operation to get attention betrayal.


Yep, much better.
Maybe if you'd like to disclose who your real mains are I could start taking you seriously and not just some obvious alt.

3-4 minute site completion will net you 15 sites an hour. Try do the math and yes I've done it.

We agree then. Buff assault and HQ!
Endeavour Starfleet
#414 - 2012-02-19 05:16:41 UTC
I have already said I don't like how a shiny fleet has the extreme advantage. For instance. The webs. Shiny fleets have more and better web ability that gives them an extreme advantage over a nonshiny fleet. Therefore a force complete paired with small changes to the spawn to make the webs and points less important will gut the difference between shiny and nonshiny.

As for alt. Well touche from one alt to another. However nobody can claim I deliberately let a fleet die.
KanashiiKami
#415 - 2012-02-19 07:09:26 UTC
Xorv wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Additionally, if you have any especially well thought-out feedback about the feature as a whole, and particularly about specific things you feel are wrong with the current implementation, go ahead and share those too!


Specific things that are wrong with Incursions:

* There's no means for players to side with the Sansha.

* High Sec Incursions are just wrong on a number of fundamental levels.
- They throw Risk vs Reward balance out the window.
- They make no sense in terms of Lore/RP. Why is CONCORD there to protect pod pilots yet unable to repel the Sansha?

Suggestions:

* Either remove Incursions from High Sec or remove CONCORD from High Sec systems for the duration of the Incursion.

* Make player standings effect Pirate NPCs reactions, allowing those with good standings to the Sansha to fight side by side with the NPCs. No artificial rewards are necessary, potential loot from destroyed Pod pilots attempting to defeat the Sansha would be sufficient.


Ideally you would scrap Incursions as they are now altogether, and remake it into something that enhances the story of EVE and fits into a game that is supposedly a player conflict driven Sandbox MMORPG. What you have now belongs in a PvE driven Themepark MMORPG and is inappropriate for a game like EVE.


hehe definately the incursion touched a raw nerve in him ....

anyway .... in terms of LORE/RP ... CCP tried live events. but it caused too much random mass destruction. so i think CCP may want to revisit LORE/RP. have sansha and concord engage in battle at warp gates !!!

and regarding reward/risk, i would re-suggest what i have posted, increased difficulty and time to clear any site, and also increase payout correspondingly.

regarding story, i must say nobody is following the story because CCP did NOT weave any evident/memorable storyline gameplay to be an epic part of the game. so ... i dont think CCP is good at that ...

BUT ... to increase storyline identity to players whop feel its importance ... CCP SHOULD change the constellation NEW EDEN into something else that can interweave story lines and EVE myths into. it should prolly become the new jita of EVE ... thats where it all started ... didnt it?

CCP threw all the hard parts to the players to run .... and then tried to POLICE it ... that ... is how it is run now ... LOL

WUT ???
Carton Mantory
Vindicate and Deliverance
#416 - 2012-02-21 19:20:24 UTC
To make this a simple response:

No matter what CCP does EVE players will do the most valued isk activity.

if we all go back t o level 5 or level 4 or mining or wormholes or havens or whatever you still not going to be doing PVP with isk valued activities.

The point of isk is to make it not blow it when you want to make it. Stop thinking EVE is fair.

Isk valued activities is what you try and stop no one component will effect any other.
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#417 - 2012-02-22 08:23:41 UTC
Xorv wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Additionally, if you have any especially well thought-out feedback about the feature as a whole, and particularly about specific things you feel are wrong with the current implementation, go ahead and share those too!


Specific things that are wrong with Incursions:

[/i]


Risk? you must be anub clinging to the threads of Goons or suckling Darius III ****.

i been running the HQ sites and sad to say there is ALOT of risk.
Among the Dead are
3 Onies
4 Guards
2 Vindi
1 Loki
before we warped out. Learn before you speak like mitanni
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#418 - 2012-02-22 08:51:23 UTC
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:

Risk? you must be anub clinging to the threads of Goons or suckling Darius III ****.

i been running the HQ sites and sad to say there is ALOT of risk.
Among the Dead are
3 Onies
4 Guards
2 Vindi
1 Loki
before we warped out. Learn before you speak like mitanni


http://www.fatal-ascension.com/killboard/index.php/kill_related/84786/

You risked nothing of significance.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Wyte Ragnarok
#419 - 2012-02-22 10:59:49 UTC
Oh yes, let's all go to null sec where we can fulfill our master's wishes. Let's take part in blob fests so I don't even know which module is active. Let's go out to null and get bored in super caps that we can't really leave without a holding alt, and spend billions on fitting.

On other thoughts, let's not.
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#420 - 2012-02-22 11:31:46 UTC
Wyte Ragnarok wrote:
Oh yes, let's all go to null sec where we can fulfill our master's wishes. Let's take part in blob fests so I don't even know which module is active. Let's go out to null and get bored in super caps that we can't really leave without a holding alt, and spend billions on fitting.

On other thoughts, let's not.

lmao, I love people who don't know how null works.

We fight, we die, we get new ships from our alliance SRF.

Oh, and as a perk, we get what would be the best income in the game, if not for relatively risk free highsec incursions.

Oh, and the not knowing which module is active? Its been fixed. TiDi is the best thing to happen to large scale fleet fights since artillery.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.