These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Possibly too far with balancing Incursions?

First post First post
Author
Apolyon I
Shadow of ISW
#321 - 2012-04-30 15:07:20 UTC
Keith Planck wrote:
Xorv wrote:
Kodavor wrote:
Xorv wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
We will be monitoring the feedback and looking at the stats over the next couple of months, comparing them to the stats we had pre-escalation, to see how things look once everyone has settled into the new changes.


Please remove CONCORD from High sec Incursions systems. A way to formally ally with the Sansha and fight on their side would be nice as well.


Do that and you will see ONLY Sansha in that constelation .


It's about time the Sansha won rather than be farmed like loot pinatas. However, if making Incursions into more EVE appropriate content is not possible the alternative is more nerfs to balance the risk free nature of High Sec Incursions with that of the rest of the game.


maybe incursions were the balanced thing and everything else in eve is just unbalanced :O

leave HS, would you, please???
Apolyon I
Shadow of ISW
#322 - 2012-04-30 15:11:29 UTC
Vizvig wrote:

Most of people in WH is isk farmers or carebears.
Most carebear in WH is one man (or 2) with large pos and 3-4 alts on dreadnought's.

Most of them pays game by PLEX.

aren't incursion exactly the same???

anyway, if you say as if wh that easy, why are you still in kspace??
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#323 - 2012-04-30 15:20:55 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Were I of an incursion-running mind, I'd invest the time and energy into figuring out the best way to capitalize on this sudden drop in interest in incursions. There's probably a lot of profit to be had for an innovative group.

The reaction seen here is exactly why The Skunkworks took such glee in griefing incursions. When CCP yanked the rug out from under us (over and over and over again) we adapted and made the best of it. We found new ways to commit acts of piracy in high sec. Here we are, barely a day into this, and the entire "community" is throwing its hands up and saying "well, that's that, incursions are dead!" I'm not normally one to look down on others, but frankly this defeatism is appalling.

For those of you who will get out there and figure out ways to restore your income level, I beg of you: don't share it with those who won't put in the effort themselves. Enjoy the contest-free incursions and reap great rewards for your effort and creativity.


Well said. But we are of course bumping up against human nature here. Some people's "morality" for lack of a better word revolves around "what works best for me".

So to them, it doesn't matter one lick if something is broken or out of place, as long as they like it. Most of us could see that being able to farm no-risk (well, no risk except the risk of someone coming in and suiciding your logi :) ) High sec content was against what eve is about.

It was exactly like that in null sec with the 1st Anom nerf (which for the record I wasn't thrilled with). Lots of people fled to either Incursions or lvl 4 missions because their "Sanctums" were gone. To bad they didn't know that Forsaken and Forlorn Hubs were (even before the 1st nerf) way better than sanctums. The moaned and moaned and moaned and CCP "buffed" anoms to the point where the already good Forsaken hubs were turn into 300 mil isk per hour Titan Farms. Of course they just not fixed that with the titan nerf, but it was crazy.

Something like that will probably happen here again. Rather than adapt to the changes and seek new opportunities (as one tends to do in a SANDBOX, the "incursion Community" will moan and moan and moan and CCP will reverse some of the changes to just stop the moaning lol.

Because some people prefer theme parks to sand boxes......
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#324 - 2012-04-30 15:46:19 UTC
Katarina Reid wrote:
You want isk go to low or null else settle for what you can get. Risk vs Reward.
Null-sec is not the risk-filled environment as perceived by some. And that's coming from a five-year null bitter vet. Yes, it takes great *effort* to carve out a chunk of null-sec territory, but the day-to-day risk of losing a ship is marginal.

Additionally, null-sec earnings on a per-character basis are no more than those living in high-sec considering some of the expenses associated with null.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

RabbidFerret
Target Practice Inc.
#325 - 2012-04-30 16:03:51 UTC  |  Edited by: RabbidFerret
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:
Katarina Reid wrote:
You want isk go to low or null else settle for what you can get. Risk vs Reward.
Null-sec is not the risk-filled environment as perceived by some. And that's coming from a five-year null bitter vet. Yes, it takes great *effort* to carve out a chunk of null-sec territory, but the day-to-day risk of losing a ship is marginal.

Additionally, null-sec earnings on a per-character basis are no more than those living in high-sec considering some of the expenses associated with null.


5 years on and off in null sec and I never once lost a ratting ship to ganks. I've seen fellow incursion runners lose ships to the slightest mistake. Incursions give a false sense of security because the players have perfected their roles so well. We should not be punished for mastering a system, for equipping our fleets with lvl 5 logis and shiny BSes.

Incursions gave increased pay based on the amount of commitment the fleet was willing to put into it. That is a great system. The previous rewards gave you the confidence to fly a 3 billion isk ship despite those butt-clenching moments when a basi DCs during a heavy-dps wave.

Amazingly, Incursions made trust into a critical gameplay element. Nowhere else in eve would you trust a complete stranger with so much of your hard work. I cannot see why CCP felt this was something worth fiddling with.
Just Alter
Futures Abstractions
#326 - 2012-04-30 16:22:06 UTC
RabbidFerret wrote:
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:
Katarina Reid wrote:
You want isk go to low or null else settle for what you can get. Risk vs Reward.
Null-sec is not the risk-filled environment as perceived by some. And that's coming from a five-year null bitter vet. Yes, it takes great *effort* to carve out a chunk of null-sec territory, but the day-to-day risk of losing a ship is marginal.

Additionally, null-sec earnings on a per-character basis are no more than those living in high-sec considering some of the expenses associated with null.


5 years on and off in null sec and I never once lost a ratting ship to ganks. I've seen fellow incursion runners lose ships to the slightest mistake. Incursions give a false sense of security because the players have perfected their roles so well. We should not be punished for mastering a system, for equipping our fleets with lvl 5 logis and shiny BSes.

Incursions gave increased pay based on the amount of commitment the fleet was willing to put into it. That is a great system. The previous rewards gave you the confidence to fly a 3 billion isk ship despite those butt-clenching moments when a basi DCs during a heavy-dps wave.

Amazingly, Incursions made trust into a critical gameplay element. Nowhere else in eve would you trust a complete stranger with so much of your hard work. I cannot see why CCP felt this was something worth fiddling with.


Beacause it was injecting too much isk in the economy and because the reward/risk ratio was out of whack compared to other activities.

However they dun goofd up.
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#327 - 2012-04-30 16:27:46 UTC
Are you all f*****g gamblers ?

Money is made only in gambles ! Money is made only in gambles ! Is that the only thing that is in your head ?

RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !

GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE !

No risk = No reward . Effort = Bullshit ! . Menagement = Bullshit ! Organization = Bullshit ! Trust = Bullshit !

Do you people even see how you look from a side ? Go play some Blink !

Fronkfurter McSheebleton
Horse Feathers
CAStabouts
#328 - 2012-04-30 16:54:09 UTC
^ not sure if serious....


CCP Affinity wrote:
We did dev blog about it, put it in patch notes and tell all the players the changes were on SISI, then we monitored the feedback and made changes again according to the feedback received from the Incursion community :) Bettik and I will continue to monitor the feedback and stats


Point of fact, to my knowledge you didn't mention the HQ nerf at all before it hit TQ.

Getting people to go test things on SISI is difficult, though....when I tried we could barely hold 10 people, much less keep enough for an assault fleet up. Perhaps something like this could be treated something like a mass test, next time? You could put the changes on SISI, and announce that, for example, whoever can gather x amount of LP in an incursion would get free skillpoints like in the mast tests.

thhief ghabmoef

Apolyon I
Shadow of ISW
#329 - 2012-04-30 17:15:03 UTC
Kodavor wrote:
Are you all f*****g gamblers ?

Money is made only in gambles ! Money is made only in gambles ! Is that the only thing that is in your head ?

RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !RISK = REWARD !

GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE ! GABMBLE !

No risk = No reward . Effort = Bullshit ! . Menagement = Bullshit ! Organization = Bullshit ! Trust = Bullshit !

Do you people even see how you look from a side ? Go play some Blink !



oh please, all capsulers that don't fly where concord is have to face those things daily.

effort, organization and trust. you HS bears shouldn't lecture us about that
Gonzo TheGreat
Donuttown
#330 - 2012-04-30 17:17:49 UTC
RabbidFerret wrote:
Amazingly, Incursions made trust into a critical gameplay element. Nowhere else in eve would you trust a complete stranger with so much of your hard work. I cannot see why CCP felt this was something worth fiddling with.


Contrary to the popular belief, EvE existed before incursions and there were instances when people trusted complete strangers, it would result in scams.
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#331 - 2012-04-30 18:55:48 UTC
Xorv wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
We will be monitoring the feedback and looking at the stats over the next couple of months, comparing them to the stats we had pre-escalation, to see how things look once everyone has settled into the new changes.


Please remove CONCORD from High sec Incursions systems. A way to formally ally with the Sansha and fight on their side would be nice as well.


Oh god, if there were DED sites in Incursion constellations that you could run for equivalent rewards from the Sansha....
Frau Leinsmarch
Mimics
#332 - 2012-04-30 19:07:26 UTC
Vizvig wrote:

Most of people in WH is isk farmers or carebears.
Most carebear in WH is one man (or 2) with large pos and 3-4 alts on dreadnought's.

Most of them pays game by PLEX.


All carebears ay?

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=13139972

That is what happens to carebear fleets in WH. I wish high-sec incursion carebears would stop bitching about how they've been slightly nerfed.

There is no risk in running incursions in high-sec, the NPCs are easier than those of a C6 WH and there is no risk in being ganked.

drdxie
#333 - 2012-04-30 20:17:44 UTC
I really don't see what all the fuss is about, you can still make more with Incursions than you can doing level 4's. The problem now is that everyone is running around crying "over nerfed" and not actually running the sites. I personally still do incursions as its a social thing for me, I make most of my isk in wh's, mostly solo :(.

Caldari Loving needed.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1608277&#post1608277

Kim Wilde
Covenant
#334 - 2012-04-30 21:54:42 UTC
javer wrote:
well that is a response we can live with,
thing is we can allready tell you that vanguards is overnerfed when a fleet needs to field 5x3bill+3x1.5bill+2x0.5bill ships to make 1/3 of before then .....
Quit making changes on a whim, and document what the hell you do. changes that aint in patch notes is called bugs for most companies, but for ccp then it means a gm will have to say sorry its a new feature suck it up and have fun....

QFT

the point made is that the changes on tq and sisi was not the same, and you had reports saying it was overnerfed at sisi and yet you forged ahead and deliverd a even more crippling change to tq
also everything you did flies in the face of stated goals from the devblog, so the opinion that the changes made from sisi wasnt tested nor documented is quite clearly true
Fronkfurter McSheebleton
Horse Feathers
CAStabouts
#335 - 2012-04-30 21:59:22 UTC
Frau Leinsmarch wrote:
the NPCs are easier than those of a C6 WH


Like hell they are. Incursion rats (high/low/null are all the same type) are MUCH more dangerous per capita. There's not as many neuts, no, but the incoming dps is far higher, there are jammers, there are snipers(120km+ orbits on some), there are battleships doing 800dps apiece while neuting, scramming, and painting you, there are still ships capable of draining a BS to 0 cap in seconds...hell, they even have fleet boosters. They also have shields, and generally higher EHP.

You can do a C6 with...what was it, four RR tengus? Try than in HQs and you'll get melted before you have time to take down anything that isn't a frigate.

thhief ghabmoef

RabbidFerret
Target Practice Inc.
#336 - 2012-04-30 23:56:29 UTC  |  Edited by: RabbidFerret
Just Alter wrote:


Beacause it was injecting too much isk in the economy and because the reward/risk ratio was out of whack compared to other activities.

However they dun goofd up.


There is some truth to this. Incursions were generation 8 trillion a month through a relatively low percentage of the population. Not quite the 26 trillion from bounties, but enough to compare to WH isk generation.

Dr EyjoG stated during fanfest that incursions were not the problem, but rather a balance issue involving too much isk being made by a select percentage. The possibility of 410 million isk per day seems like a lot, but I know a good many market traders, complex runners and wormholers that make a billion overnight.

Yet, this hardly warranted an immediate, rushed fix. That's exactly what this was. Affinity, your team rushed to push this out before the patch without collecting the proper data or really analyzing the impact this would have. 20 days of Sisi testing was nowhere near enough. Please include the need for urgency in the dev blog also.

Incursion populations were on the rise. Perhaps we were all drawn towards the isk faucet, but I'm willing to bet a good percentage of the population were just glad to have a source of income that didn't involve mechanics that have been around for 9 years (and don't involve living out of a POS).

The real issue facing the eve economy, as Dr EyjoG said, is a lack of isk *sinks*. More isk is coming into our wallets than leaving it. The solution is not to **** off your subscribers by ruining their activities, but to give us more content to spend our hard-earned isk on. Revert these changes and do this right.

Also, the low-risk issues of incursions have been discussed. Safety in incursions was/is an illusion. 2 people can run 10/10 sites.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#337 - 2012-05-01 00:15:53 UTC
CCP Affinity wrote:
We did dev blog about it, put it in patch notes and tell all the players the changes were on SISI, then we monitored the feedback and made changes again according to the feedback received from the Incursion community :) Bettik and I will continue to monitor the feedback and stats

Might it be possible to obtain some idea of the degree which it was intended for incursion, particularly VG income, to come down? And were the benchmarks used the average fleet or "shiny fleet" setups (or are those the average now)?
DJ N00B
National Order Of Bastards Yearning
#338 - 2012-05-01 00:53:17 UTC  |  Edited by: DJ N00B
RabbidFerret wrote:
[quote=Just Alter]


The real issue facing the eve economy, as Dr EyjoG said, is a lack of isk faucets.


just to correct the statement....should read lack of isk sinks.

He also stated during the discussion that the total amount of money coming in (faucet) to whole economy was over 50 trillion per month while the money going out (sink) was only about half that. So....

Even if you take incursions out entirely you would still have a large imbalance to the faucets vs sinks. Prior to incursions they absolutely should have know that adding another faucet would only compound this issue. Again, they stated incursion money wasn't the problem and that real issue was lack of balance of faucet vs sink. Also as so many have stated, there are plenty of other ways for people to make as much as or more isk running incursions. So the whole argument about how nerfing incursions was to bring the economy back in balance is BS.
RabbidFerret
Target Practice Inc.
#339 - 2012-05-01 00:54:42 UTC
DJ N00B wrote:
RabbidFerret wrote:
[quote=Just Alter]


The real issue facing the eve economy, as Dr EyjoG said, is a lack of isk faucets.


just to correct the statement....should read lack of isk sinks.



Corrected, thank you..
Galerak
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#340 - 2012-05-01 01:08:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Galerak
I completely agree with the OP. I agree that vg's needed a nerf and honestly for the past year I've been predicting a large nerf or a removal based on story and plausibility. But as CCP has opted not to remove incursions, I think they have nerfed them a little too hard. One or maybe 2 of the changes would have been sufficient to balance vg payout per time invested.

Since the changes:
Fleet composition has become more specific and exclusive to compensate for the increased difficulty and public/pick up fleets are just gone. (At least I havent seen a single random fleet doing vg's since the patch)

Shiny fleet groups (such as BTL, ISN, SAQD, DTM etc) have been less active as it has been harder to fill all the roles required. For example the group I usually fleet with ran almost around the clock, replacing people/FCs as necessary and splitting into additional fleets when enough people were waiting. Since the patch, it has taken up to 7-8 hrs for the same group to get a single fleet running and the fleet runs for as little as a few hrs.

Prior to the changes, random pick up fleets took 5-6 min per vg (time is from start of one site to start of following site) and organized group fleets (BTL/ISN etc) took about 4 min. Site times are now averaging 7 minutes for organized fleets. Almost double the time for 90% of the previous payout which means ISK/hr is down about 40-60% depending on how smoothly the fleet keeps running.

In summary, I think that while a nerf was needed for balance, the number of changes have caused an imbalance in the other direction. As it is now Vanguards are as profitable as Lvl 4 missions but require the teamwork and coordination of 11 pilots in roughly 2+billion isk ships.

Also I'd like to propose that CCP consider a LP or ISK bonus for Fleet commanders. These guys work hard to tag targets, keep a waiting list, broadcast aligns/destinations, remind you to pull drones or when to start running the ore and a multitude of other things on top of flying and shooting... please show the Incursion FC's some love!