These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP - End Highsec Incursions

First post First post
Author
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2015-04-28 04:10:49 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Drop Concord protection in incursion systems.
Leave the income as is.
Need no other changes to the incursion mechanics.
Make your 200+ isk/hr, now you deserve it.

Not sure why anyone would ever go to one of these over one in actual lowsec.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#222 - 2015-04-28 04:11:43 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Maybe something is being missed here but why the fixation on carriers? Why do they have some sort of increased income expectation to you?


Sheer firepower they can produce.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:

By that logic should supercarriers be the ultimate ratting machines?


They used to be but CCP nerfed them several years ago.
Mario Putzo
#223 - 2015-04-28 04:12:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


And it is perfectly possible and acceptable for any pilot to engage in these activities. So again I am not sure what the issue is. If you want to suckle on the teet you only need to open your mouth. Elsewise its nothing but whining. If you want to live in 0.0 and only play in 0.0 cool, not everything is fair in EVE. Nothing at all stopping you from heading to HS every now and then to milk the cow. Seems like a bad case of entitlement to me.


The problem is that you are not getting rewarded for taking on more risk and effort. If CCP wants smaller corps and alliances out in nullsec then they are going to have to make it worth moving out there.



Did you ever think that the reason people don't go to NS is because in its current fashion it is literally the aids that is killing this game? NS is ****. It is **** to live there, it is **** to play there, it is so **** 90% of NS is empty. Perhaps instead of continuing to attempt to encourage people to move there through making HS equally ****, you should post constructive ideas about making NS not ****.

Truesec being the only decent space to do anything in. ****.
Having 50K Blues surrounding you 30 jumps in every direction because sov mechanics suck. ****
It being more efficient to import from HS than actually produce anything in NS. ****
Literally being dependent on JFs to service most of NS space. ****.

NS is so ****, you have the largest coalition grinding structure HP in three regions, where nobody actually lives anymore...because there is literally nothing left for them to do. 2 months before Structure HP is going to die in the fire it should have years ago.

Fun engaging times come live in NS today!

Why in the **** would anyone actually want to live there...Oh they don't 75% of active players in this game choose to play in HS. The most active area of space is LS with nearly a 1:1 ratio of pilots:systems. People don't go to NS because it is literally the worst ******* area to play this game, whats your fun per hour? Probably ******* low as balls.

If you want to improve NS F+I is over that way, join the discussion in the dozens of threads, contribute ideas on how to make NS a more enjoyable place, a place where people want to go because they desire it, not because they don't have any other choice to play the game the way they want to play the game. Nerfing HS will not make people desire to go to NS, they will just quit the game if it gets to the point they no longer enjoy it. Fun fact, not everyone has ambitions to build sand castles and kick others sand castles over, not everyone needs to wrap themselves up in a ~narrative~ in order to undock.

Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them. If you choose not to employ them, then you are literally no better than the guys who complain endlessly about gankers, and if ISK/HR is so god damn important to you, and your definition of fun...then go run HS incursions, there is literally nothing stopping you from doing them.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#224 - 2015-04-28 04:15:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

By that logic should supercarriers be the ultimate ratting machines?


They used to be but CCP nerfed them several years ago.

Sounds like my knowledge is outdated then.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#225 - 2015-04-28 04:20:00 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
highsec rage


They are changing null sov mechanics and we have as a result abandoned several regions.

Mario Putzo wrote:
Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them.


Easy to say but near impossible to do. You cannot gank these fleets and hope to make anything but a massive loss. They sport hefty tanks, roll with six and up t2 logi ships and pack a lot of firepower. They will rip apart a gank fleet like a knife through butter.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#226 - 2015-04-28 04:21:45 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Sounds like my knowledge is outdated then.


Very. Nobody has ratted with supers since the tracking titan nerf and supers lost access to normal drones.
Mario Putzo
#227 - 2015-04-28 04:23:27 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Easy to say but near impossible to do. You cannot gank these fleets and hope to make anything but a massive loss. They sport hefty tanks, roll with six and up t2 logi ships and pack a lot of firepower. They will rip apart a gank fleet like a knife through butter.


LOL the ironing is delicious.

"Hey guys HS Incursions aren't Risky enough"

Then go do something about it.

"Nah man too much risk"

what a ******* joke.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#228 - 2015-04-28 04:25:51 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Sounds like my knowledge is outdated then.


Very. Nobody has ratted with supers since the tracking titan nerf.

Well, then I suppose my point stands even further that bigger pricetags don't seem to indicate increased PvE performance, leaving aside the question of a lone pilot vs a fleet mandating activity.

Thanks for the education on the matter. Much appreciated.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#229 - 2015-04-28 04:28:07 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
highsec rage


They are changing null sov mechanics and we have as a result abandoned several regions.

Mario Putzo wrote:
Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them.


Easy to say but near impossible to do. You cannot gank these fleets and hope to make anything but a massive loss. They sport hefty tanks, roll with six and up t2 logi ships and pack a lot of firepower. They will rip apart a gank fleet like a knife through butter.

Honest question, most incursions sit with the mom exposed for days, leaving a clear course to end the isk making potential while avoiding any more risk of loss than the incursion runners themselves face. Why is this not utilized more often? Also why is ganking usually considered the first thought for a player based solution rather than this.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#230 - 2015-04-28 04:28:22 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Easy to say but near impossible to do. You cannot gank these fleets and hope to make anything but a massive loss. They sport hefty tanks, roll with six and up t2 logi ships and pack a lot of firepower. They will rip apart a gank fleet like a knife through butter.


LOL the ironing is delicious.

"Hey guys HS Incursions aren't Risky enough"

Then go do something about it.

"Nah man too much risk"

what a ******* joke.


There is a difference between risk and near impossible. Suicide ganking tactics do not work against a battleship fleet with logi support.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#231 - 2015-04-28 04:31:02 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Honest question, most incursions sit with the mom exposed for days, leaving a clear course to end the isk making potential while avoiding any more risk of loss than the incursion runners themselves face. Why is this not utilized more often? Also why is ganking usually considered the first thought for a player based solution rather than this.


We did do this for a while but there is not enough profit to justify this tactic long term.
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#232 - 2015-04-28 04:38:59 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Drop Concord protection in incursion systems.
Leave the income as is.
Need no other changes to the incursion mechanics.
Make your 200+ isk/hr, now you deserve it.

Not sure why anyone would ever go to one of these over one in actual lowsec.


Lowsec would still be higher risk.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#233 - 2015-04-28 04:43:18 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Drop Concord protection in incursion systems.
Leave the income as is.
Need no other changes to the incursion mechanics.
Make your 200+ isk/hr, now you deserve it.

Not sure why anyone would ever go to one of these over one in actual lowsec.

Lowsec would still be higher risk.

When any hostile group has freedom to travel to the doorstep of the constellation under concord protection I can't help but doubt the accuracy of that statement.
Mario Putzo
#234 - 2015-04-28 04:47:22 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Easy to say but near impossible to do. You cannot gank these fleets and hope to make anything but a massive loss. They sport hefty tanks, roll with six and up t2 logi ships and pack a lot of firepower. They will rip apart a gank fleet like a knife through butter.


LOL the ironing is delicious.

"Hey guys HS Incursions aren't Risky enough"

Then go do something about it.

"Nah man too much risk"

what a ******* joke.


There is a difference between risk and near impossible. Suicide ganking tactics do not work against a battleship fleet with logi support.


Who said anything about suicide ganking.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#235 - 2015-04-28 04:58:36 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:


Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them. If you choose not to employ them, then you are literally no better than the guys who complain endlessly about gankers, and if ISK/HR is so god damn important to you, and your definition of fun...then go run HS incursions, there is literally nothing stopping you from doing them.


Why, exactly, would I or anyone else gank the incursions we are profiting from? We ARE doing them. That's how we know the imbalance exists. That's what you don't get, an imbalance doesn't stop being an imbalance just because people partake in it. I also have an alt in the Tribal Liberation Front flying a purifier and making more isk in an hour (in LP that gets dumped when we are at tier 4 or greater) than incursions and null anoms combined.

Making that kind of wealth with a stealth bomber is unbalanced. Making twice as much isk with THE SAME HULL in the safety of high sec than you would risking that half billion isk pirate hull in null sec is similarly broken. The only pve that works correctly in EVE online is wormhole PVE, the ret is broken,

You might not care, but those of us who PVE tend to, because those imbalances create distortions in the game eco-system that result in bad consequences. Here is the text book example of it. That change should have worked, it should have created more conflict in null. More conflict means more ships dying. More ships dying means more profits for HIGH SEC ship builders and mission runners who provide modules via loyalty points. It would have meant that null sec people could have lived in null rather than taking up space in high sec incursion fleets that high sec pilots could have enjoyed. It should have meant more targets (content) for null, low and wormhole raider types who would day trip into sov null for kills.

But it didn't, because why fight over pennies when you can go to high sec (or faction warfare, or a wormhole) and make more with (in high sec's case) less chance of loss or interruption. The ONLY think the change in that link did was make high sec incursion wait lists expand.


And the 'imbalance deniers" and "high sec partisans" Are too bloody short sighted to understand any of this. The high sec types cling to their imbalances not understanding that an end to it means more for EVERYONE (better value for miners, industrialists and mission runners because null people can actually live in null where things blow up because it's lucrative enough, less wait time for high sec incursion fleets because fewer null alts, fewer null sec alts crapping up high sec in general and NO MORE of these threads).

But hey, it's ok, you guys deny the existence of something that not only can you test for yourselves, but also that distorts the game to the point that it's actually having an affect on you now, and folks like me will keep flying in high sec incursions (well, i won't, been doing them for two weeks, tired to death of them for at least a month) occupying fleet spots you could have had lol. Enjoy that wait list.
Mario Putzo
#236 - 2015-04-28 05:01:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them. If you choose not to employ them, then you are literally no better than the guys who complain endlessly about gankers, and if ISK/HR is so god damn important to you, and your definition of fun...then go run HS incursions, there is literally nothing stopping you from doing them.


Why, exactly, would I or anyone else gank the incursions we are profiting from? We ARE doing them. That's how we know the imbalance exists. That's what you don't get, an imbalance doesn't stop being an imbalance just because people partake in it. I also have an alt in the Tribal Liberation Front flying a purifier and making more isk in an hour (in LP that gets dumped when we are at tier 4 or greater) than incursions and null anoms combined.


An imbalance compared to what exactly? As far as I know incursions also exist in Lowsec, and Nullsec. So where exactly is this imbalance?

Also I didn't say anything about ganking them...think outside of the box friend.

(also please don't include me with "you guys" thanks. I have never done a single incursion, and probably never will.)
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#237 - 2015-04-28 05:14:50 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them. If you choose not to employ them, then you are literally no better than the guys who complain endlessly about gankers, and if ISK/HR is so god damn important to you, and your definition of fun...then go run HS incursions, there is literally nothing stopping you from doing them.


Why, exactly, would I or anyone else gank the incursions we are profiting from? We ARE doing them. That's how we know the imbalance exists. That's what you don't get, an imbalance doesn't stop being an imbalance just because people partake in it. I also have an alt in the Tribal Liberation Front flying a purifier and making more isk in an hour (in LP that gets dumped when we are at tier 4 or greater) than incursions and null anoms combined.


An imbalance compared to what exactly? As far as I know incursions also exist in Lowsec, and Nullsec. So where exactly is this imbalance?

Also I didn't say anything about ganking them...think outside of the box friend.

(also please don't include me with "you guys" thanks. I have never done a single incursion, and probably never will.)


You want me to Logi the Sansha?
Lol, mate, just laughing at that possibility...Lol
Mario Putzo
#238 - 2015-04-28 05:17:19 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Besides, if you want to do something about HS incursions and their risk factor then do it. Mechanics exist in this game that allow you to create risk for them. If you choose not to employ them, then you are literally no better than the guys who complain endlessly about gankers, and if ISK/HR is so god damn important to you, and your definition of fun...then go run HS incursions, there is literally nothing stopping you from doing them.


Why, exactly, would I or anyone else gank the incursions we are profiting from? We ARE doing them. That's how we know the imbalance exists. That's what you don't get, an imbalance doesn't stop being an imbalance just because people partake in it. I also have an alt in the Tribal Liberation Front flying a purifier and making more isk in an hour (in LP that gets dumped when we are at tier 4 or greater) than incursions and null anoms combined.


An imbalance compared to what exactly? As far as I know incursions also exist in Lowsec, and Nullsec. So where exactly is this imbalance?

Also I didn't say anything about ganking them...think outside of the box friend.

(also please don't include me with "you guys" thanks. I have never done a single incursion, and probably never will.)


You want me to Logi the Sansha?
Lol, mate, just laughing at that possibility...Lol


Ding ding ding, we have a winner!



baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#239 - 2015-04-28 05:19:52 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:


Ding ding ding, we have a winner!





Doesn't work.
Mario Putzo
#240 - 2015-04-28 05:26:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Ding ding ding, we have a winner!





Doesn't work.


I would love to see a source for that. Works on every other NPC in the game, NPC list also includes Sanshas Incursion Rats. Of course you probably haven't actually attempted it. Neither have I, but I have gone into missions and repped rats others were shooting. So ya, source please.