These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mario Putzo
#681 - 2015-05-02 08:13:49 UTC
knobber Jobbler wrote:
High sec production? Yes.


Actually LS, but 1 jump out is close enough ya Big smile
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#682 - 2015-05-02 11:13:49 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:

Secondly I don't hate NS


The majority of your post history disagrees.

And yes, by the way, nerfing incursions would fix anoms and a bunch of other things besides, because income, and purchasing power thereby, are relative.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Kaye Kaye
Doomheim
#683 - 2015-05-05 01:49:58 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Kaye Kaye wrote:
I play solo so don't run incursions, but...

It bugs me when players can't see past their personal game.
There are over 500,000 accounts with at least over 100,000 players.

You should be able to find something to do in game without changing someone Else's.

That's not possible.
Ignorance doesn't magically change how reality works.

Whatever you do affects someone else ...
... even absense of influence, because you could have.

There is not a single thing you can do ...
... nowhere, ever ...
... that doesn't so somehow have effects on others.

Maybe try being less ignorant, self centered and antisocial.

Ha... yeah, right.



You do realize this is a game right?

1) Just because you think LOW and NULL are cool places to hang out with your time, many others don't.
2) Those others want fun things to do as well, things THEY think are fun, not you!
3) Let me repeat the 1st one for you.... Not everyone wants to play this game the way you do, but still want to play it. This may mean you don't always get your way; which is nerfing HS to get players to go to unsafe space so you can play with them.
4) THIS IS THE BIG ONE HERE: After only a few months, maybe 6; you have all the money you need to play solo for free and fly any ship you want.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#684 - 2015-05-05 04:35:28 UTC
Kaye Kaye wrote:



You do realize this is a game right?

1) Just because you think LOW and NULL are cool places to hang out with your time, many others don't.
2) Those others want fun things to do as well, things THEY think are fun, not you!
3) Let me repeat the 1st one for you.... Not everyone wants to play this game the way you do, but still want to play it. This may mean you don't always get your way; which is nerfing HS to get players to go to unsafe space so you can play with them.
4) THIS IS THE BIG ONE HERE: After only a few months, maybe 6; you have all the money you need to play solo for free and fly any ship you want.


And like every game ever made you need it to be balanced well. If the safest area of space provides the best income why would anyone go to the more dangerous areas that require more effort, investment and risk?
Inquisitor Tyr
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#685 - 2015-05-05 09:33:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Tyr
Hey guys!

So the last time you carebear numbskulls started complaining about how boring and/or easy it was to kill rats in the game, you know what happened?

Well, CCP made it more "interesting" to rat. How did they achieve this great feat you ask?

Instead of running the site you ran before - you now run the same site, but the rats alternate the targets. So your drones, fleet members, and logi support can all die. See, its much more interesting when the rats alternate targets.

Stop complaining about systems that effectively put isk in your wallets. Or would you like CCP to make something more interesting again ?
Mario Putzo
#686 - 2015-05-05 10:05:52 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kaye Kaye wrote:



You do realize this is a game right?

1) Just because you think LOW and NULL are cool places to hang out with your time, many others don't.
2) Those others want fun things to do as well, things THEY think are fun, not you!
3) Let me repeat the 1st one for you.... Not everyone wants to play this game the way you do, but still want to play it. This may mean you don't always get your way; which is nerfing HS to get players to go to unsafe space so you can play with them.
4) THIS IS THE BIG ONE HERE: After only a few months, maybe 6; you have all the money you need to play solo for free and fly any ship you want.


And like every game ever made you need it to be balanced well. If the safest area of space provides the best income why would anyone go to the more dangerous areas that require more effort, investment and risk?


Maybe because they want to PVP with less effort, investment, and risk.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#687 - 2015-05-05 15:19:24 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
Otso Bakarti wrote:
Please, make others' enterprise less profitable, or at least make mine more so! It's only fair!
Though, I don't do anything remotely like these other people, and never go where they are, the
very thought that they're there making ISK just bugs me. So, CCP, take your million dollar machine
and turn it toward my inclinations and personal preferences. You know the Great Gaming God is on my side!


no its the fact that they are making the most amount of isk while undocked in the game with practically 0 risk. on a system based on risk vs reward its totally not within that system


Incursions dont even come close to wormholes as far as income.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#688 - 2015-05-05 19:39:06 UTC
Absolutely disagree that a fun and engaging aspect of highsec pve should even be considered to be removed from the game. Also, this is one of the few highsec activities that not only encourages but actually requires you to group up with others to accomplish and CCP loves that.

Let me say first off before my next comment: I am and always have been 100% highsec carebear and proudly so. I have fought adamantly against the normally poor treatment we receive from CCP with regards to our chosen area of game play, especially with regards to protecting our income.

As i mentioned in another post the term 'moderate' should ring true when discussing incomes in highsec. Not low as it is for highsec PI nor as high as it is for incursions or FW. Incursions and FW should payout more than running L4s but not as much more as they currently do.

Lets get to balancing this income situation as soon as possible.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#689 - 2015-05-05 19:48:21 UTC
Group PvE.

A good thing.

That is all.

Carry on.

Not today spaghetti.

ashley Eoner
#690 - 2015-05-06 02:14:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Vic Jefferson wrote:
This is seriously harder than you think it is. Sure, you will generate a few ALODs from dingleberries who go AFK on gates or autopilot through Uedama/Niarja in their incursion boat, but actually ganking people in the sites isn't all that easy.

Now...if the rats didn't shoot people with high Sansha's Nation standings...Oh yes.Twisted



baltec1 wrote:
Good luck finding 100+ gankers who are wiling to blow these things up at a massive loss.



Oh come on it's like you guys don't even care about reality anymore.

11 catas easily takes out boosters and faction fit battleships. There's been a few incursion related ganks lately proving that. Then again those people aren't being lazy and poopooing on the forums they are actually out there doing it. Hell I could do it on my own but it's not worth my time to go to highsec.

Think hitting taking out a HQ fleet's boosters midsite won't cause some issues?


Jenn aSide wrote:
Wormhole space is the most dangerous in EVE, it is no one elses fault if you don't understand that.

Carriers. You need CARRIERs, in the single most dangerous par tof EVE space, to match or exceed what can be made in HIGH SEC protected by concord while using su caps.

Thanks for helping me prove my point.

You need ONE carrier one dreadnaught and a couple other ships. Bammo +800m an hour with less effort than incursions.

You could in theory do it without the carrier but it'd require a lot more effort.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#691 - 2015-05-06 04:21:55 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:



Oh come on it's like you guys don't even care about reality anymore.

11 catas easily takes out boosters and faction fit battleships. There's been a few incursion related ganks lately proving that. Then again those people aren't being lazy and poopooing on the forums they are actually out there doing it. Hell I could do it on my own but it's not worth my time to go to highsec.

Think hitting taking out a HQ fleet's boosters midsite won't cause some issues?



Feel free to try to take out logi supported BS gangs with just 11 catalysts. As for bosters, they are not needed. I tanked incursions in my harpy fit megathron, its not hard.

Telling people to go attack others doesn't fix the problem that highsec PVE pays more than null PVE.
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#692 - 2015-05-06 06:51:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Telling people to go attack others doesn't fix the problem that highsec PVE pays more than null PVE.


Since when is molon labe not principal around here? it is a complete and utter lie to decry that there is no risk is because players decline to bring it. It's player driven content, but some around here only know how to steer into barges or freighters.

baltec1 wrote:
Good luck finding 100+ gankers who are wiling to blow these things up at a massive loss.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1698538#post1698538

Working as intended.
Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#693 - 2015-05-06 07:55:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
ashley Eoner wrote:
You need ONE carrier one dreadnaught and a couple other ships. Bammo +800m an hour with less effort than incursions.

You could in theory do it without the carrier but it'd require a lot more effort.


last time i was in a wormhole it was 2 carriers, 6 dreads and half a dozen lokis to make probably not even 800mil an hour (wont even go into the cost of the caps and lokis), less effort than anchoring up and shooting the tags?, pretty much anyone can do incursions risk free, you dont even need to watch dscan, good luck finding a nice wormhole where you can just rock in and make lots of isk without any risk and minimal skills, dont forget the effort of rolling the wormhole to make it semi safe and the fact you dont have any local to notice any reds coming in, the logistical efforts of not having any markets or stations nearby, lose a capital in a wormhole and you cant just autopilot in your shuttle to jita to buy another one. wormholes are just 1 big massive effort in every situation and cannot be compared to incursions, wormholers sacrifice a serious amount of benefits/services to make isk and risk a hella lot more.

Cipher Jones wrote:
Incursions dont even come close to wormholes as far as income.


i really wish people would stop comparing wormholes, clearly you have never lived in a wormhole to understand

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#694 - 2015-05-06 08:22:42 UTC
This is a good thread.

I approve the premise and the potential resolution. Smile
Druze Okaski
Caldari Offshore
#695 - 2015-05-06 11:21:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Druze Okaski
After reading everything it looks like all the risk in Incursions have been dealt with by the players. Fleet doctrines, secure movement between locations as well as knowledge about triggers and rat abilities. And of course letting the Incursion run as long as possible.

So the high payouts are made possible by the players. It is possible to make more ISK in other areas of the game but in reality it does not because other players interfere.
This is the reason many want the option to kill Incursion runners. They want to be able to lower the income. But killing is a low an null sec option. Yes, it does exist in high sec but outside of CODE (who kill for fun) it is only done for profit because of CONCORD.

Now people gank freighters so it should be possible to gank some battleships as well. If you really want to it should not matter if it doesn't pay well.
Imagine if freighters would only move in fleets with logi, scout and webber support. It is simply not done because is not necessary. So nobody does it. For Incursions a fleet is a must. It basicly forces people to act clever and as a team or they won't win. This makes killing them a no-go for most.

Reading all that's been said the best options to lower the income of Incursion runners are the following:

1. Run the Incursions yourself. More competition lowers individual income. (Works on the market as well as we all know.)

2. End the Incursions as soon as possible. Point 1 leads directly to this option. It gives the Incursion runners less time to farm. They have to move to the next location and every minute spend on moving is a minute lost creating income through Incursions.

A side effect of causing them to move more often is the option to kill them on the move. Yes, they know they are being hunted. Yes, they use travel fits, blockade runners and all the tricks in the book. But more moving (and refitting) means more chance for human error.

So please use all your options first before you call for the nerf bat. Just because you don't like the options does not make it broken.



BTW: It looks like the low and null sec gatecamps should be removed or high sec should receive them.
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#696 - 2015-05-06 14:31:25 UTC
Druze Okaski wrote:

Reading all that's been said the best options to lower the income of Incursion runners are the following:

1. Run the Incursions yourself. More competition lowers individual income. (Works on the market as well as we all know.) .

ShockedRollX

The "if you can't beat them, join them" logic is always a flawed argument.

Otherwise we would all be flying with Baltec1 or (insert other giant Alliances here).

Another way to put it:
You don't end greed by being more greedy than the other guy.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#697 - 2015-05-06 14:41:16 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Druze Okaski wrote:

Reading all that's been said the best options to lower the income of Incursion runners are the following:

1. Run the Incursions yourself. More competition lowers individual income. (Works on the market as well as we all know.) .

ShockedRollX

The "if you can't beat them, join them" logic is always a flawed argument.

Otherwise we would all be flying with Baltec1 or (insert other giant Alliances here).

Another way to put it:
You don't end greed by being more greedy than the other guy.


Except this is a CCP game so more people being greedy would show the imbalance even more and more than likely get it fixed if they see it needs to. Look at most of the past "controversial" changes that happened and I would bet you can remember history of such things getting used more and more before it got revised by CCP. It took months after drone mods affecting fighter really generated much complaints because the usage was rather limited. Once more people jumped on the bandwagon, the complaints got traction. Same for drone assists.

If incursion are as game breaking as people try to make it sound in this thread, CCP won't have a choice but to intervene if too many people do it or risk the economy slipping away.

It's a stupid way to deal with stuff IMO but it seems to be the one that player can do so ...
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#698 - 2015-05-06 15:03:04 UTC
Inquisitor Tyr wrote:
Hey guys!
...
Stop complaining about systems that effectively put isk in your wallets. Or would you like CCP to make something more interesting again ?

Confirming drifters should regularly show up in incursions and doomsday carebear loot piniata's. This would be an acceptable risk offset to how incursions are simply being farmed right now. Truly, why bother going to null when all that delicious ISK is just waiting for you to hop into an incursion channel in hisec...

Nerf incursions.

That is all.

F
Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#699 - 2015-05-06 15:09:51 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Inquisitor Tyr wrote:
Hey guys!
...
Stop complaining about systems that effectively put isk in your wallets. Or would you like CCP to make something more interesting again ?

Confirming drifters should regularly show up in incursions and doomsday carebear loot piniata's. This would be an acceptable risk offset to how incursions are simply being farmed right now. Truly, why bother going to null when all that delicious ISK is just waiting for you to hop into an incursion channel in hisec...

Nerf incursions.

That is all.

F


kinda dont agree with that, i dont believe adding more npc contact is actually adding any risk to the situation

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Joe Atei
Aes Dei Asher
#700 - 2015-05-06 15:51:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Atei
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Druze Okaski wrote:

Reading all that's been said the best options to lower the income of Incursion runners are the following:

1. Run the Incursions yourself. More competition lowers individual income. (Works on the market as well as we all know.) .

ShockedRollX

The "if you can't beat them, join them" logic is always a flawed argument.

Otherwise we would all be flying with Baltec1 or (insert other giant Alliances here).

Another way to put it:
You don't end greed by being more greedy than the other guy.


Except this is a CCP game so more people being greedy would show the imbalance even more and more than likely get it fixed if they see it needs to. Look at most of the past "controversial" changes that happened and I would bet you can remember history of such things getting used more and more before it got revised by CCP. It took months after drone mods affecting fighter really generated much complaints because the usage was rather limited. Once more people jumped on the bandwagon, the complaints got traction. Same for drone assists.

If incursion are as game breaking as people try to make it sound in this thread, CCP won't have a choice but to intervene if too many people do it or risk the economy slipping away.

It's a stupid way to deal with stuff IMO but it seems to be the one that player can do so ...


I believe this happens because of whining on the forums. While only a minority actually post, I bet a lot more lurk for valuable information. When people start clamoring about how x, y, and z is imbalanced, lurkers will usually be the first to try it out because they're here looking for valuable information that will get them ahead. Similarly to how I will be engaging drifters differently because of valuable information I have learned very recently. It's a lot like when piracy wasn't all that a big deal. The more press releases all these companies and regulation agencies made about piracy, the more popular it got. It's now to the point people in law enforcement agencies don't even view it as a big deal. I personally never have as well.

When it comes to Eve, I believe people bring up issues like this to purposely get people more involved so that CCP can take action which will have a positive net result for themselves. The markets will never get out of balance due to incursions because of the soft caps that are already in place. Never mind the fact the markets have already stabilized with the introduction of incursions. When you have uneducated people doing something that yields more profit, they're going to stick to what they know works. The grand majority of people, day in and day out, do the same things that yield them a personal satisfactory profit. They never critically think to themselves in such a way that would allow them to make even more profit because they are either content, which is a by product of ignorance sometimes, or because they are incapable.

I personally believe, this entire topic stinks with that kind of agenda. Talk about it enough to get the followers to hop on it and stick with it. But it will fail in the end because of the soft caps. What would happen instead is the income would get redistributed into different hands if everyone jumped in on it. I also believe, over time, if the competition got out of control it would resolve itself because of the soft caps and how income potential is diminished if you have too many players. More players also doesn't necessarily mean faster completion times outweighing efficient, proper sized fleets. Usually more people = more poop happens because of an innumerable amount of confounding variables at play due to so many people there with a preconceived idea of how things ought to be when they go apply themselves to the situation at hand.

At the end of the day, there are ways to stop something you don't like in this game. "Just do it!"