These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

A True Answer To High Sec Incursions
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#21 - 2012-03-15 13:34:31 UTC  |  Edited by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
Don't drop the level for the whole system, just in the incursion deadspace. If a gank fleet is willing to warp into an active site and risk being targeted by Sansha AND engaged by the incursion fleet, they should be able to do so. This keeps the concord protection for people who are passing through and staging fleets.

This would also lead to some interesting incursion shenanigans as contested sites could turn into fleet brawls.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Caellach Marellus
Stormcrows
#22 - 2012-03-15 14:20:32 UTC
Cyniac wrote:
Dmitri Dracov wrote:
Keep the rewards the same, just lower the sec status of the systems the Incursions are affecting to 0.4 until the Incursions are over! It's adds to the roleplay element - Sanshas Nation have taken over the systems - allows RP element because pirates and Cultists of Sansha can plague the lawless systems until the npcs are destroyed. All criminal actions in the systems would affect sec status as normal.

To stop any carebears stumbling into the area by mistake all auto pilot jumps are stopped when reaching the area. Nobody can enter the area or undock from stations in affected areas without bypassing a huge warning flash up that they have to click passed to continue.

Simples.



Hmm... you mean I get to wait for an incursion in the Kimotoro constellation to bring in a cap fleet and clear out a few of moons around there... hmm...

While I would personally find that highly entertaining I can see how some people would see it as a bit of a problem.

Actually it would be awesome to shoot down the customs offices and put up new ones which would then be CONCORD defended once the incursion is over though!


Can't light cynos in Incursion constellations.

OP idea is daft for the reasons it's always been daft. Incursion fleets are limited to size restrictions, PvP fleets are not.

When your gut instincts tell you something is wrong, trust them. When your heart tells you something is right, ignore it, check with your brain first. Accept nothing, challenge everything.
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-03-15 21:00:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Zyress
False Incursions don't have a Boolean answer
Drew Solaert
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-03-16 02:31:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Drew Solaert
I was preparing to bathe the OP in the makers flame but tbh

Its actually a sound proposal. +1 sir.

I lied :o
Ivar Avar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2012-03-16 18:42:12 UTC
Blatant Forum Alt wrote:
Dmitri Dracov wrote:
Keep the rewards the same, just lower the sec status of the systems the Incursions are affecting to 0.4 until the Incursions are over! It's adds to the roleplay element - Sanshas Nation have taken over the systems - allows RP element because pirates and Cultists of Sansha can plague the lawless systems until the npcs are destroyed. All criminal actions in the systems would affect sec status as normal.

To stop any carebears stumbling into the area by mistake all auto pilot jumps are stopped when reaching the area. Nobody can enter the area or undock from stations in affected areas without bypassing a huge warning flash up that they have to click passed to continue.

Simples.


Or just restrict incursions to low and null sec space... achieves the same thing, but without ******* over the local systems with the sec drop.


The local systems should be ****** over by a security status drop, hell it's an incursion right? Brilliant idea in dropping security status with incursions. As is, you fly into an incursion sector and notice some differences, but it's never that "OH **** PIRATES ARE ATTACKING THE SYSTEM" fear or anything. It's just more like, "oh an incursion is going on but i can safely ignore it."
Eso Es
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-03-17 14:32:46 UTC
Alec Freeman wrote:
I agree. However for the sake of story I think it would still be a 0.5-1.0 and the higher the systems original sec status was the higher the concord security hit (so if you kill someone in an incursion 0.5 system you would get 2x to 3x the sec status hit of a 0.4 and in a 1.0 it would be 4x to 6x the sec status hit of a 0.4. And possibly buffed gate and station guns too decrease the risk too newbies traveling through.


Since when do noobs do Incursions?

This is a fantastic idea, Incursions should never have been put in HiSec where there is no risk whatsoever.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#27 - 2012-03-18 08:05:40 UTC
Linda Soh wrote:


I agree completely with you on the logic of this, but so long as people as risk adverse, CCP will not do this and alienate their playerbase.


They're already alienating multiple parts of the player base by not doing something along the lines suggested by the OPer.
Cedo Nulli
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2012-03-18 21:28:41 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Linda Soh wrote:


I agree completely with you on the logic of this, but so long as people as risk adverse, CCP will not do this and alienate their playerbase.


They're already alienating multiple parts of the player base by not doing something along the lines suggested by the OPer.



Moongoo lords / bot-horders ? Those unfortunate sobs with -10 and too cheap to have incursion capable alts ? Gankers aka the true 0-risk folks ?

Who are they alienating with a highsec activity that actually requires people to talk to eachother and work as a team ?
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#29 - 2012-03-18 22:25:26 UTC
Cedo Nulli wrote:

Who are they alienating with a highsec activity that actually requires people to talk to eachother and work as a team ?


Null Sec residents, WH residents, Low Sec Residents, anyone else who appreciates Risk vs Reward balance. Pirates, Gankers, Roleplayers, and anyone that likes Sandbox MMORPGs and dislikes Themepark MMOs.


Remove buffed Concord interference from systems with an Incursion and allow for players to side with the Sansha and all the complaints atm about High Sec Incursions would vanish. Players that want their high reward PvE firewalled from PvP would complain, but those players don't belong in a player conflict driven Sandbox MMO anyway, and last time I heard that's what EVE is supposed to be.
RuralJur0r
Law Offices of Bob Loblaw
#30 - 2012-03-19 08:50:49 UTC  |  Edited by: RuralJur0r
Xorv wrote:
Cedo Nulli wrote:

Who are they alienating with a highsec activity that actually requires people to talk to eachother and work as a team ?


Null Sec residents, WH residents, Low Sec Residents, anyone else who appreciates Risk vs Reward balance. Pirates, Gankers, Roleplayers, and anyone that likes Sandbox MMORPGs and dislikes Themepark MMOs.


Remove buffed Concord interference from systems with an Incursion and allow for players to side with the Sansha and all the complaints atm about High Sec Incursions would vanish. Players that want their high reward PvE firewalled from PvP would complain, but those players don't belong in a player conflict driven Sandbox MMO anyway, and last time I heard that's what EVE is supposed to be.


There would need to be a reworking of the core mechanics of incursion sites. As someone who has mostly run Shield HQ and occasionally AS fleets, there are a few problems with simply dropping the sec rating of the system:

Sites which produce huge amounts of alpha damage require full tank fits (TCRCs, Mom bomber waves). For shield fleets this poses a tricky problem in which dropping mid slots for tackle in case of pvp can result in a very quick trip to your pod regardless of whether the bad guys (pvpers) show up or not.

Incursion AI works off of a threat mechanic so the attacking party would not gain the full attention of the npcs. The incursion fleet logi ships would probably gain aggro.

As stated before Incursion fleets are limited by size whereas any marauding party is not. Additionally Incursion fleets do not have the ship diversity (Tackle) necessary to function as a competent pvp group.

Unless the fundamental mechanics of Incursions are changed and an incursion group has a fair chance of defending itself, the PvE PvP firewall is going to exist as they are separate content. I appreciate a good Risk/Reward balance far less than I appreciate compelling and entertaining gameplay. Incursions are probably the best thing CCP has done in promoting a social and cooperative environment versus the korean grindfest model of L4s (and actually most PvE content in the game). Nearly all the suggestions for "fixing" incursions thus far are a complete joke. Most all of them including OP and several posts in this thread just want a bunch of free pirate bs killmails with none of the risk. You should probably stick to high sec station games and Jita undock camping to keep you busy while the grown ups do an actual evaluation and come up with real and plausible solutions.
The Vastator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2012-03-19 10:03:34 UTC  |  Edited by: The Vastator
As stated before, no one will run sites in a 0.4 system unless you are looking for a fight/baiting. People won't simply go there, unless it's the only route to a market hub. Also, if you think you can repeatedly gank anyone running incursions in a 0.5 system then please try to do so, you'll be shocked when you get steamrolled.

Xorv wrote:
Linda Soh wrote:


I agree completely with you on the logic of this, but so long as people as risk adverse, CCP will not do this and alienate their playerbase.


They're already alienating multiple parts of the player base by not doing something along the lines suggested by the OPer.


Who are they alienating if I may ask? you can still gank peeps in 1.0 systems iirc so...
Gibbo3771
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#32 - 2012-03-21 11:33:57 UTC
Delete the code, retry?
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#33 - 2012-03-21 20:24:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Let's add some actual figures for this discussion to compare

Whenever a Incursion is ended everyone who ran a site gets a mail which thanks them for their help and in it is a list containing the people with the highest LP amassed. I've removed the names

High-sec Incursion Zemont

1 1.068.22
2 1.002.64
3 673.51
4 611.50
5 518.96
6 508.87
7 495.51
8 483.61
9 469.96

Low-sec Incursion Okakuola (close to Tama

1 263.64
2 245.08
3 234.14
4 227.82
5 216.94
6 176.41
7 176.41
8 169.44
9 158.08

When comparing these numbers, keep in mind that high-sec pays only 70% of the amount of LP you get for low-sec. Whichever way you look at it, it's clear that the assumption that 'nobody runs low-sec Incursions' is plain wrong.

I do think however too few people who have the skills, balls and gear, to do low-sec Incursions, aren't doing it because it's simply not worth it.

  • Running low-sec Incursion's 40% increase in payout doesn't really cover the high risk of getting harassed by pirates or curbstomped by a bored null-Alliance.

  • It doesn't cover the additional discipline and tactics like scouting required akin to that of a real combat fleet. There aren't many Incursions-FC that are both willing and capable enough to take a PUG, to lend a term from WoW, into low-sec.

  • And it doesn't cover the decreased speed in which sites can be cleared due to fewer people risking their shiniest ships or even fitting their ships with a PvP-able fit.


I think the people who are running low-sec Incursions are ran by people who are already living there, null-sec pilots who can call backup on a whim or the brave few who simply like the danger. I doubt anybody does it because it 'pays better', because in the end, with all the added risk and effort, it simply doesn't

As for Incursions making too much money... that's only with Vanguards I think, which either pay to much, or are too easily blitzed. I think running HQ sites might actually earn even less than grinding L4 agents, because of all the downtime between sites that come with running a 40-man fleet

The whole dropping the constellation to 0.4 sounds like a cool idea but is way to 'hardcore' for CCP to ever take serious. It also won't really fix any underlying problems and just create a ton of new ones.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Xemnus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2012-03-30 19:34:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Xemnus
I don't know guys...

High sec incursions are the reason I am able to fund PvP ships. When incursions came out and I started getting money. I was willing to actually lose ships and PvP. Without incursions, I did missions and we know level 4 missions can only fund you with so much...

I KNOW I am not the only one who started getting into PvP after incursions, so why would you take incursions away from high sec people who aren't ready to PvP?

That sounds like you want to force them to leave the game..



EDIT: Seriously, can we have ONE way to earn very good money in high sec for people who spend Skillpoints to shoot instead of mine and manufacture? I've seen it myself, high sec people going on low sec roams after popping an mom. I just don't understand why everyone is against it.


I promise to PeeVeePee!
Alec Freeman
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2012-03-30 21:26:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Alec Freeman
Eso Es wrote:
Alec Freeman wrote:
I agree. However for the sake of story I think it would still be a 0.5-1.0 and the higher the systems original sec status was the higher the concord security hit (so if you kill someone in an incursion 0.5 system you would get 2x to 3x the sec status hit of a 0.4 and in a 1.0 it would be 4x to 6x the sec status hit of a 0.4. And possibly buffed gate and station guns too decrease the risk too newbies traveling through.


Since when do noobs do Incursions?

This is a fantastic idea, Incursions should never have been put in HiSec where there is no risk whatsoever.


So wait... 2 month old chars in meta fit machariels arnt noobs anymore.
Previous page12