These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Hyperion] Incursion changes on Sisi now

First post First post First post
Author
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#21 - 2014-08-11 18:51:18 UTC
Tycho Naskingar wrote:
Tragot Gomndor wrote:
currently running distress beacon...
setup: 2x remote armor nestors, 1x shield nightmare, crap fits

too much ecm, too high hitpoints, we are doing it for like 30min already and only got to the second spawn, i hope theres not another... maybe works when counteracting the ecm somehow, we have no eccm :D

edit: okay, we got a third spawn, so we ragequited

for everyone else, each spawn had 8 cruisers, some frigs, first spawn had 4-6 ecm cruiser, second spawn had a fleeing cruiser, moved to 150km...


Agreed, the amount of ECM in these sites is ridiculous and ECCM just doesn't seem to work. Haven't finished one yet running 2 to 4 domis. Maybe with a dedicated trigger and silly sensor strength but I haven't tried that yet.

As I see it now, all you could do would be marauders.

The incursion rats use an ECM mechanic which is not dependent on sensor strength. It is a straight 100% chance to jam.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

colera deldios
#22 - 2014-08-11 18:58:39 UTC  |  Edited by: colera deldios
@CCP FoxFour

You should be nerfing HS Incursions to the point where the avg. isk/hour is bellow that of 0.0 Instead of giving them even more ISK at no RISK. If you need me to list 30 reasons why HS Incursions should not make as much as 0.0 let me know.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#23 - 2014-08-11 19:06:48 UTC
Otuk Andven wrote:

given that Vanguard meta is focused around battle cruisers and a few solo logi I suspect they'll be designed as an slightly easier version of this and good thing too. One of the major problem with incursions is the high requirements mean that only a few big groups do it. By creating these small sites you can get corps and other group coming in and trying it out without competing with the major group.

Uhm.......

Vanguard meta is currently battleships and t2 logi. the lightest tanked shield channels want at least a t2 invuln and DC2 with a t1 em rig. Lightest armor channel I know of runs t2 fit t1-hull cruiser logi and single EANM fits. Combat battlecruisers are almost unused in mainland highsec (what most people think of when they hear incursions without any modifiers). Attack battlecruisers are used almost exclusively for NCNs.
Corporate fleets happen occasionally, but are usually out-contested by the incursion channel-based communities in HS.This is the intended sort of meta, as CCP would long ago have changed contest mechanics given the number of tears if these mechanics were not as intended.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Saraki Ishikela
Perkone
Caldari State
#24 - 2014-08-11 19:07:28 UTC
I liked the ideas being tossed around to make a cruiser/BC sized spawn that can be run by 3-5 people so newer players can run these and participate in the content.

If the current feedback of 4-5 Battleships taking 30+ minutes to run these is correct then they will still most likely go ignored.

TLDR Everyone in Battleships will still run Vanguards, let newer players run these in smaller ships.

One newbies quest to ExploreEVE: [u]Youtube[/u]: www.youtube.com/exploreeve - **[u]**Blogspot:[/u] http://exploreeve.blogspot.com [u]Twitter:[/u] www.twitter.com/exploreeve** - [u]Facebook[/u]:** www.facebook.com/exploreeve

Yuri Semah
Dead Corporation 10985
#25 - 2014-08-11 19:11:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Yuri Semah
Tried a Distress Beacon... first wave had 3 Antems, 4(!!!) Arnons, 1 Jel, 1 Mara and 1 Orkashu. That's about 1200 paper dps - about half of what you get in VGs, still too much for a local rep on a T1 BS (unless you sacrifice everything for it). 5 ECM ships, in VGs you have a maximum of 3, and all of them are frigates which you can shoot off the field really quick. If those Arnons decide to go crazy you have 4 out of your 5 ships on grid doing nothing. Lastly there are 561k EHP on field - that is as much as the 1st wave of an NMC with 5 Romis.

Less ECM and less EHP to get through, please.
JamDunc
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#26 - 2014-08-11 19:42:40 UTC
I am assuming there is a trick we are missing?

I remember when Incursions first launched and everyone thought they were CRAZY. Once we learned the tactics they were easy. I'm not smart enough to work out the tactics though.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2014-08-11 19:45:47 UTC
CCP FoxFour wrote:
Hey guys,


  • The re-spawn time between an incursion ending and it re-spawning has been lowered.


I'd like a clarification..
Ending re-spawn time, and it re-spawning has been lowered, contradict eachother..

Either it has no re-spawn time, in which case as soon as one dies, a new one spawns.. OR you've just lowered the re-spawn time to less than the current 24-48hr window.

Which is it?

Also, I would like it if you adjusted incursion so that the mom doesn't spawn as soon as influence is 0.. I mean even it just making it not span till the next dt.. or earliest it'll spawn is 48hrs after the Incursion spawned.. something so we don't have to move every day.. or if as I read, the spawn's start to happen instantly, we might be looking at 5 or so incursions a day.. that's just insane for BS fleets to move..

Some degree of stability would be much appreciated.
Mara Tessidar
Perkone
Caldari State
#28 - 2014-08-11 19:50:48 UTC
Remove incursions from highsec or make them less profitable than being in nullsec/lowsec/wormhole space.
Kithran
#29 - 2014-08-11 19:51:08 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Tycho Naskingar wrote:
Tragot Gomndor wrote:
currently running distress beacon...
setup: 2x remote armor nestors, 1x shield nightmare, crap fits

too much ecm, too high hitpoints, we are doing it for like 30min already and only got to the second spawn, i hope theres not another... maybe works when counteracting the ecm somehow, we have no eccm :D

edit: okay, we got a third spawn, so we ragequited

for everyone else, each spawn had 8 cruisers, some frigs, first spawn had 4-6 ecm cruiser, second spawn had a fleeing cruiser, moved to 150km...


Agreed, the amount of ECM in these sites is ridiculous and ECCM just doesn't seem to work. Haven't finished one yet running 2 to 4 domis. Maybe with a dedicated trigger and silly sensor strength but I haven't tried that yet.

As I see it now, all you could do would be marauders.

The incursion rats use an ECM mechanic which is not dependent on sensor strength. It is a straight 100% chance to jam.


Incorrect - it is simply that the rats jam strength increases each time it fails to jam - see here:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=430301#post430301
Kithran
#30 - 2014-08-11 19:54:07 UTC
Mara Tessidar wrote:
Remove incursions from highsec or make them less profitable than being in nullsec/lowsec/wormhole space.


Considering how much territory the CFC controls they already are. You can run null sec incursions in safety and make more than high sec.

There is one person I know of who has simply been running missions in npc null - a few weeks and he now has 20 billion and 12 plex.

Next strawman please.
Mara Tessidar
Perkone
Caldari State
#31 - 2014-08-11 20:07:49 UTC
As one of the people who has recently run missions out of 5ZXX, I can assure you, I know quite well that highsec incursions make more money. And not only that, but they exist in safety. If I want to run missions, my friends and I have to control the 5ZXX station undock and the surrounding system gates. This involves a process I'm sure you're unfamiliar with known as "killing people." This is an element of the game noticeably lacking in highsec, and it remains an error on the part of CCP that high reward activities continue to exist in these safe areas.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#32 - 2014-08-11 20:09:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
can you remove gate rats from lowsec incursions?

Typically active areas are empty for the duration of incursions. There are several problems with those rats. Firstly they can, if you are unlucky instant point and web you, while not following any rules of player ships. Sometimes they sleep and completely ignore you for 10s and sometimes they instantly tackle you (including ewar and what not). They don't drop anything, they don't comply to ship fitting rules and are therefore hard to fight with pvp ships. Rats designed to be killed by a group of pve ships should not hang around at gates in completely over the top stats (again: they don't even drop anything).

i know that you probably hoped that "if they **** players off long enough they will come and close the incursion". But nobody would do that, people usually avoid the whole area for roams. Not to mention that this is not even in the interest of incursion runners themselves since they want to farm the incursion till the last minute instead of closing it early. I am sure you have the statistics yourself. Amamake was literally empty the last time i saw an incursion there (about 1-2 month ago).

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Kithran
#33 - 2014-08-11 20:53:50 UTC
Mara Tessidar wrote:
As one of the people who has recently run missions out of 5ZXX, I can assure you, I know quite well that highsec incursions make more money. And not only that, but they exist in safety. If I want to run missions, my friends and I have to control the 5ZXX station undock and the surrounding system gates. This involves a process I'm sure you're unfamiliar with known as "killing people." This is an element of the game noticeably lacking in highsec, and it remains an error on the part of CCP that high reward activities continue to exist in these safe areas.


I wasn't referring to trying to run npc missions for a corp with just a single station - of course that is going to be camped.

If you can't show enough common sense to do it somewhere safe you have no chance.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#34 - 2014-08-11 21:01:59 UTC
If it's not the gankers, it's the Wh'ers if not them the Nul sec'ers everyone is an expert on how easy Incursions are, regardless of what the actual players using the content say.

They are not risk free regardless of where they are located, there are about a 100 posts that explain in detail what and where the risks are, look them up, they are in threads littered all over the forums.

This thread 'Incursion changes on Sisi now' in the 'feedback' sub-forum is for feedback on the current iteration of Scout sites currently available on SiSi. If you want them nerfed, eliminated or changed specific to one region then start a thread in the proper forum with the proper title, otherwise contribute to this conversation by running a few scout sites on SiSi and advise Fox Four of tweaks needed before the release date.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.

Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#35 - 2014-08-11 21:05:09 UTC
I used to sometimes take a couple of brand new players into scout site, just for the experience. We could run scout sites with 2-3 day old newbies before with 1 experienced logi frig pilot. Will this still be possible?

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!

Zand Vor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#36 - 2014-08-11 21:12:57 UTC
Just tried a site in a Golem on Sisi. I was fitted for more tank than gank and couldn't break a Mara's shield rep in the 1st wave.

Pyfa reports me at 674 dps using Precision missiles. I may try again with dual-painters and 4 BCS.

I don't see how anything non-Marauder is going to deal w/ that much ECM though.

Please fix wormhole combat sites: c1 20mil - c2 40 mil - c3 80 mil - c4 160 mil - c5 320 mil - c6 640 mil

Fortorn Lonshanks
Adeptus Incursio
#37 - 2014-08-11 21:21:38 UTC
I'd like to go on record here about the "highly profitable" activities in high sec.

1. This is a PVE activity that requires massive group coordination and/or Boxing to succeed. This is unlike null sec PVE isk/hour which requires NO coordination to do referencing anomalies, DED sites, exploration, belt ratting. Also referencing coordination based on alliance structure and CTAs i'm going to put that in the realm of PVP.

2. There is plenty of risk. A standard PVE ship in null is likely T2 fitted with maybe a few "necessary to run" faction mods. High sec incursion ships are worth FAR FAR more than those null sec "throw away" ships. IF a null sec ratter loses a ship, talking 300-500m but when a nigh sec incursioner loses one at the least its 1-2b isk.

3. The sheer amount of people in null sec ratting FAR exceeds the number of people running incursions in high sec in any given moment. The isk/faucet in null pours waterfalls, high-sec incursions are more like streams. Streams also in that only a finite maximum number of players at any one time can be making the isk in incursions at any given second. The maximum number of players farming null has likely never been reached.

To CCP I say this, be cautious. Don't target the entire game except NULL. WH community is already in near open rebellion. We don't all want to kiss the ring of the isk gods living null. I request that you be fair handed and start putting forth ideas on how to stop the isk faucet in null starting immediately.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#38 - 2014-08-11 21:29:59 UTC
Fortorn Lonshanks wrote:
I'd like to go on record here about the "highly profitable" activities in high sec.

1. This is a PVE activity that requires massive group coordination and/or Boxing to succeed. This is unlike null sec PVE isk/hour which requires NO coordination to do referencing anomalies, DED sites, exploration, belt ratting. Also referencing coordination based on alliance structure and CTAs i'm going to put that in the realm of PVP.

2. There is plenty of risk. A standard PVE ship in null is likely T2 fitted with maybe a few "necessary to run" faction mods. High sec incursion ships are worth FAR FAR more than those null sec "throw away" ships. IF a null sec ratter loses a ship, talking 300-500m but when a nigh sec incursioner loses one at the least its 1-2b isk.

3. The sheer amount of people in null sec ratting FAR exceeds the number of people running incursions in high sec in any given moment. The isk/faucet in null pours waterfalls, high-sec incursions are more like streams. Streams also in that only a finite maximum number of players at any one time can be making the isk in incursions at any given second. The maximum number of players farming null has likely never been reached.

To CCP I say this, be cautious. Don't target the entire game except NULL. WH community is already in near open rebellion. We don't all want to kiss the ring of the isk gods living null. I request that you be fair handed and start putting forth ideas on how to stop the isk faucet in null starting immediately.

+1 for stuffing a gag in all the whiny Null Sec 'bears Big smile
If putting eyes on a station and some gates is too much for you to do, you'd rage quit at trying anything in a WH. Or, more likely, you'd cry to a CSM rep about "fixing" the WH "carebears" who kick you out when you set up a tower.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2014-08-11 21:40:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
Zand Vor wrote:
Just tried a site in a Golem on Sisi. I was fitted for more tank than gank and couldn't break a Mara's shield rep in the 1st wave.

Pyfa reports me at 674 dps using Precision missiles. I may try again with dual-painters and 4 BCS.

I don't see how anything non-Marauder is going to deal w/ that much ECM though.

Logi triforce.

I also think the 5-ship limit goes against the idea of promoting group gameplay. limiting the numbers makes more sense for higher sites, which are more viable/survivable due to the triple logi [minimum] consuming a smaller portion of the gang.

I'm not sure what is being avoided with a payout curve of 5. as an ISK faucet, scouts are a long way from being a gusher.

I think the curve for Vanguard sites should be lower. on separate occasions I've tanked them with [only] three basilisks, and again with [only] three remote rep faction battleships (2 rattlesnakes, 1 nightmare). what you're seeing with Vanguards is a minimum of 3 logistics, and anything beyond that is just DPS. anything over 6 (3 logi, 3 DPS battleships) is purely a race-to-the-finish factor.

what I'm saying is the payout curve misses the mark in both scouts and vanguards. they should both be 6 or 7.

the minimum difficulty of vanguard sites is cleared at 6.

a payout curve of 5 removes the option of larger groups in scout sites.
Thatt Guy
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2014-08-11 21:41:14 UTC
I'm actually firing up the test server for this, not sure if it will be good or bad, but we shall soon see. Twisted

Back with feedback "Soon"

Haters gonna hate, Trolls gonna troll.