These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1441 - 2015-11-27 11:18:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Cool, thank you!

Assuming the info is correct, it seems then, that HS Incursions, HS Lv.4 Mission Blitzing, NS Carrier Anomaly Ratting and NS DED Exploration are pretty much on par, payout wise.

I do think this is still a bit odd, considering that - boredom aside - in HS you can run missions/incursions 16 hours a day, non stop with minimal risk, whereas in Nullsec, interruptions are bound to happen. Stupidity aside, you will not lose the Carrier*, but you will at some point have to dock, and potentially reship and fight, and while doing that, not make any money. Let's be realistic, folks - risk in Nullsec is not that high. Correct me if I am wrong due to living in a fortress.

So far, I'd say balance is only slightly off. Not as bad, however, as one could assume it is when reading this thread. (again: assuming the info is correct)

Next are W-Space sites. Pretty much the same as for nullsec applies for W-Space as well - some dude logs in in your hole or strolls into it, and you may have to postpone the jewing for a while. At a first glance, those numbers look ridiculous. 200-400M/h? But I wonder - how realistic is the notion of running C5 Sites for hours on end, as can be done with incursions, missions and NS anomalies. Would be nice if a Hole-Dweller (or are they called "Worms"?) could shed some light on this. My endeavours to W-Space have been rather short, and never took me anywhere beyond Class 4.

What really strikes me as not very accurate and potentially out of balance is "Faction Warfare: 50-200 mil per hour. Varies wildly with faction levels, luck, etc. Consider hostiles as well." for Low Sec. Any insight on how that goes? Average would be 125M, which would still be on par with about everything else. How realistic is it to reap in 200M/h 16 hours a day?

In my opinion, Trading, Mercenary work and other things where goods and money come from other players do not count. If people are willing to give you a trillion ISK for whatever you do - all the power to you! This discussion should only focus on activities aiming at "generating" goods and ISK from thin air.

So far, I do not see a reason to "End HS Incursions" or even hit them with the Nerf-Club too hard. A slight reduction in HS income in general does sound reasonable, though.

*) I have yet to lose a Ratting Carrier, or even just an AFKtar after almost 3 years of anomaly running. It will happen eventually, but if it does, it will be because I have fallen asleep in Space.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#1442 - 2015-11-27 11:40:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Neuntausend wrote:
Let's be realistic, folks - risk in Nullsec is not that high. Correct me if I am wrong due to living in a fortress.

Risk in null can be very low. In some cases, lower than some systems and activities in highsec.

However, the difference between risk in null and risk in high (just to compare two extremes) is that low risk in null is bought about by players actively managing the risk. Low risk in highsec is inherent to the mechanics of the game.

Low population in null also contributes to low risk, although in many cases players need to manage hazards as though they exist because of roaming gangs, etc. even in systems with low activity.

That's where a lot of the argument comes from in this thread.

That for the equal reward, there is a large difference in the hazards that need to be managed.

So through the thread, there has been an argument to either nerf the income from incursions in highsec, or keep the income the same but increase the hazards associated with running incursions, with the most common suggestion being to remove or delay CONCORD in affected systems.

A lot of it is based around the view that a lot of highsec incursion runners are alts of nullsec players and that if the rewards in HS are reduced, or risks to manage increased, then these players will play more on their nullsec characters.

If that happens, then incursion fleet places will open up for pure HS players and nullsec will have an increase in activity. Win-win for everyone in a Utopia.
Avvy
Doomheim
#1443 - 2015-11-27 12:03:25 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Neuntausend wrote:
Let's be realistic, folks - risk in Nullsec is not that high. Correct me if I am wrong due to living in a fortress.

Risk in null can be very low. In some cases, lower than some systems and activities in highsec.

However, the difference between risk in null and risk in high (just to compare two extremes) is that low risk in null is bought about by players actively managing the risk. Low risk in highsec is inherent to the mechanics of the game.

Low population in null also contributes to low risk, although in many cases players need to manage hazards as though they exist because of roaming gangs, etc. even in systems with low activity.

That's where a lot of the argument comes from in this thread.

That for the equal reward, there is a large difference in the hazards that need to be managed.

So through the thread, there has been an argument to either nerf the income from incursions in highsec, or keep the income the same but increase the hazards associated with running incursions, with the most common suggestion being to remove or delay CONCORD in affected systems.

A lot of it is based around the view that a lot of highsec incursion runners are alts of nullsec players and that if the rewards in HS are reduced, or risks to manage increased, then these players will play more on their nullsec characters.

If that happens, then incursion fleet places will open up for pure HS players and nullsec will have an increase in activity. Win-win for everyone in a Utopia.


Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there. The only thing that was a potential threat was the odd red scout checking out the system, so all we had to do was fly to a POS, report it and wait a few minutes until they left again. Which probably ties in with what was being said as the systems were very low population ones. So keeping an eye on local chat was all you really had to do.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#1444 - 2015-11-27 12:09:17 UTC
Avvy wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Risk in null can be very low. In some cases, lower than some systems and activities in highsec.

Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there.

Yep.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#1445 - 2015-11-27 12:09:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Neuntausend wrote:
Cool, thank you!

Assuming the info is correct, it seems then, that HS Incursions, HS Lv.4 Mission Blitzing, NS Carrier Anomaly Ratting and NS DED Exploration are pretty much on par, payout wise.

I do think this is still a bit odd, considering that - boredom aside - in HS you can run missions/incursions 16 hours a day, non stop with minimal risk, whereas in Nullsec, interruptions are bound to happen. Stupidity aside, you will not lose the Carrier*, but you will at some point have to dock, and potentially reship and fight, and while doing that, not make any money. Let's be realistic, folks - risk in Nullsec is not that high. Correct me if I am wrong due to living in a fortress.

So far, I'd say balance is only slightly off. Not as bad, however, as one could assume it is when reading this thread. (again: assuming the info is correct)

Next are W-Space sites. Pretty much the same as for nullsec applies for W-Space as well - some dude logs in in your hole or strolls into it, and you may have to postpone the jewing for a while. At a first glance, those numbers look ridiculous. 200-400M/h? But I wonder - how realistic is the notion of running C5 Sites for hours on end, as can be done with incursions, missions and NS anomalies. Would be nice if a Hole-Dweller (or are they called "Worms"?) could shed some light on this. My endeavours to W-Space have been rather short, and never took me anywhere beyond Class 4.

What really strikes me as not very accurate and potentially out of balance is "Faction Warfare: 50-200 mil per hour. Varies wildly with faction levels, luck, etc. Consider hostiles as well." for Low Sec. Any insight on how that goes? Average would be 125M, which would still be on par with about everything else. How realistic is it to reap in 200M/h 16 hours a day?

In my opinion, Trading, Mercenary work and other things where goods and money come from other players do not count. If people are willing to give you a trillion ISK for whatever you do - all the power to you! This discussion should only focus on activities aiming at "generating" goods and ISK from thin air.

So far, I do not see a reason to "End HS Incursions" or even hit them with the Nerf-Club too hard. A slight reduction in HS income in general does sound reasonable, though.

*) I have yet to lose a Ratting Carrier, or even just an AFKtar after almost 3 years of anomaly running. It will happen eventually, but if it does, it will be because I have fallen asleep in Space.


Players organize fleets and do incursions because of the high payout, if this activity is nerf then players would stop doing them.

As for hi-sec missions, the only faction you can run for that pays well are SOE and Thurker Tribes. The other empire faction isk/LP conversion rates are pathetic in comparison and are pretty much ignored. The only corrections I see to be made their is the revamping of the LP stores (like removing or lowering tag requirements for certain items) and making missions unblitzable.

That and I wouldn't be against CCP making a grandeur version of incursions exclusively for null space that spawns at least 2 mega incursions in each region per day.
Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1446 - 2015-11-27 12:16:38 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Neuntausend wrote:
Cool, thank you!

Assuming the info is correct, it seems then, that HS Incursions, HS Lv.4 Mission Blitzing, NS Carrier Anomaly Ratting and NS DED Exploration are pretty much on par, payout wise.

I do think this is still a bit odd, considering that - boredom aside - in HS you can run missions/incursions 16 hours a day, non stop with minimal risk, whereas in Nullsec, interruptions are bound to happen. Stupidity aside, you will not lose the Carrier*, but you will at some point have to dock, and potentially reship and fight, and while doing that, not make any money. Let's be realistic, folks - risk in Nullsec is not that high. Correct me if I am wrong due to living in a fortress.

So far, I'd say balance is only slightly off. Not as bad, however, as one could assume it is when reading this thread. (again: assuming the info is correct)

Next are W-Space sites. Pretty much the same as for nullsec applies for W-Space as well - some dude logs in in your hole or strolls into it, and you may have to postpone the jewing for a while. At a first glance, those numbers look ridiculous. 200-400M/h? But I wonder - how realistic is the notion of running C5 Sites for hours on end, as can be done with incursions, missions and NS anomalies. Would be nice if a Hole-Dweller (or are they called "Worms"?) could shed some light on this. My endeavours to W-Space have been rather short, and never took me anywhere beyond Class 4.

What really strikes me as not very accurate and potentially out of balance is "Faction Warfare: 50-200 mil per hour. Varies wildly with faction levels, luck, etc. Consider hostiles as well." for Low Sec. Any insight on how that goes? Average would be 125M, which would still be on par with about everything else. How realistic is it to reap in 200M/h 16 hours a day?

In my opinion, Trading, Mercenary work and other things where goods and money come from other players do not count. If people are willing to give you a trillion ISK for whatever you do - all the power to you! This discussion should only focus on activities aiming at "generating" goods and ISK from thin air.

So far, I do not see a reason to "End HS Incursions" or even hit them with the Nerf-Club too hard. A slight reduction in HS income in general does sound reasonable, though.

*) I have yet to lose a Ratting Carrier, or even just an AFKtar after almost 3 years of anomaly running. It will happen eventually, but if it does, it will be because I have fallen asleep in Space.


Players organize fleets and do incursions because of the high payout, if this activity is nerf then players would stop doing them.

As for hi-sec missions, the only faction you can run for that pays well are SOE and Thurker Tribes. The other empire faction isk/LP conversion rates are pathetic in comparison and are pretty much ignored. The only corrections I see to be made their is the revamping of the LP stores (like removing or lowering tag requirements for certain items) and making missions unblitzable.

That and I wouldn't be against CCP making a grandeur version of incursions exclusively for null space that spawns at least 2 mega incursions in each region per day.


Is there really a downside that some people will stop doing incursions if payouts lowered? probably only the vets who have ample amounts of isk will quit, new players will probably find something else to do.

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*

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1447 - 2015-11-27 12:23:02 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
I don't honestly get it.


I do.

Carebears always project.

In this instance, they project their fundamental selfishness and dishonesty onto whomever they're arguing with. They have a selfish ulterior motive for wanting incursions to stay, so they assume you must have one if you want them gone.


Hahaha, oh please. "Elite" PvPers are just as big of babies. "Waaaaaaaah! I can't force them into places where I can kill them easily!" The only one projecting here is you, because you're the one trying to force people to play or do what you want them to because you don't like what they do now. Well, it ain't up to you. Get used to it.


I'm not trying to force anyone to do anything.

I just think risk should equate to reward.

You clearly think you are entitled to all the reward and zero risk. You're wrong.

"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.

Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1448 - 2015-11-27 12:27:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
Avvy wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Neuntausend wrote:
Let's be realistic, folks - risk in Nullsec is not that high. Correct me if I am wrong due to living in a fortress.

Risk in null can be very low. In some cases, lower than some systems and activities in highsec.

However, the difference between risk in null and risk in high (just to compare two extremes) is that low risk in null is bought about by players actively managing the risk. Low risk in highsec is inherent to the mechanics of the game.

Low population in null also contributes to low risk, although in many cases players need to manage hazards as though they exist because of roaming gangs, etc. even in systems with low activity.

That's where a lot of the argument comes from in this thread.

That for the equal reward, there is a large difference in the hazards that need to be managed.

So through the thread, there has been an argument to either nerf the income from incursions in highsec, or keep the income the same but increase the hazards associated with running incursions, with the most common suggestion being to remove or delay CONCORD in affected systems.

A lot of it is based around the view that a lot of highsec incursion runners are alts of nullsec players and that if the rewards in HS are reduced, or risks to manage increased, then these players will play more on their nullsec characters.

If that happens, then incursion fleet places will open up for pure HS players and nullsec will have an increase in activity. Win-win for everyone in a Utopia.


Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there. The only thing that was a potential threat was the odd red scout checking out the system, so all we had to do was fly to a POS, report it and wait a few minutes until they left again. Which probably ties in with what was being said as the systems were very low population ones. So keeping an eye on local chat was all you really had to do.


yeah if you stay in the same system then risk is low sometimes, till you meet the npc null people like pizza who will place a covert cyno alt in every system you rat in and kill capitals and ratting ships daily, its not very safe if you have to take a 2bil isk marauder or carrier 6 jumps through hostile space to finish an escalation, bubbles, blops roaming fleets etc etc.

Its also not safe to do incursions in null/low because they move around so they are pretty much unfarmable like they in highsec, not to mention the gate rats will tear anything you fly apart if you jump into an incursion.

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*

Avvy
Doomheim
#1449 - 2015-11-27 12:30:57 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:

Is there really a downside that some people will stop doing incursions if payouts lowered? probably only the vets who have ample amounts of isk will quit, new players will probably find something else to do.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but incursions are done by just random people working together.

Why would you want to stop something that brings players together?


Some of the best fun I've had in MMO's (due to the mechanics) was in Warhammer Online with their RvR (realm v's realm) when the sides were fairly equal (unfortunately not that often).
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1450 - 2015-11-27 12:38:06 UTC
Avvy wrote:

Why would you want to stop something that brings players together?


Why not? CCP has done much the same thing to salvaging, what once used to need two characters(which was a great way to introduce newbies to the game by having them salvage for you) is now completely replaced by the MTU.

They've set a precedent of doing that before, and for far less reason than they have to deal with incursions, which break the game on a number of levels.

"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.

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1451 - 2015-11-27 13:20:00 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Avvy wrote:

Why would you want to stop something that brings players together?


Why not? CCP has done much the same thing to salvaging, what once used to need two characters(which was a great way to introduce newbies to the game by having them salvage for you) is now completely replaced by the MTU.

They've set a precedent of doing that before, and for far less reason than they have to deal with incursions, which break the game on a number of levels.


You comparing the act of salvaging to the act of forming 40 man pickup fleets for the purpose of completing challenging tasks... well that just about says how shallow your argument is doesn't it?

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1452 - 2015-11-27 13:20:15 UTC
Avvy wrote:

Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there. The only thing that was a potential threat was the odd red scout checking out the system, so all we had to do was fly to a POS, report it and wait a few minutes until they left again. Which probably ties in with what was being said as the systems were very low population ones. So keeping an eye on local chat was all you really had to do.


Which is way more effort than one has to do in high sec. That's the point.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1453 - 2015-11-27 13:21:33 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Avvy wrote:

Why would you want to stop something that brings players together?


Why not? CCP has done much the same thing to salvaging, what once used to need two characters(which was a great way to introduce newbies to the game by having them salvage for you) is now completely replaced by the MTU.

They've set a precedent of doing that before, and for far less reason than they have to deal with incursions, which break the game on a number of levels.


You comparing the act of salvaging to the act of forming 40 man pickup fleets for the purpose of completing challenging tasks... well that just about says how shallow your argument is doesn't it?


About as shallow as comparing a 40 man fleet to the 4000 man alliance that had to take the pay to upgrade space for people to rat in.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1454 - 2015-11-27 13:23:18 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Avvy wrote:

Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there. The only thing that was a potential threat was the odd red scout checking out the system, so all we had to do was fly to a POS, report it and wait a few minutes until they left again. Which probably ties in with what was being said as the systems were very low population ones. So keeping an eye on local chat was all you really had to do.


Which is way more effort than one has to do in high sec. That's the point.


Except for most of the time you can't use Local Chat as an intel tool against threats in High-Sec. You don't know how many of the 100 in local are Talos gank alts... in Null, your threat levels are given to you by default of what corp/alliance you are in.

Try harder.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1455 - 2015-11-27 13:26:21 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Avvy wrote:

Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there. The only thing that was a potential threat was the odd red scout checking out the system, so all we had to do was fly to a POS, report it and wait a few minutes until they left again. Which probably ties in with what was being said as the systems were very low population ones. So keeping an eye on local chat was all you really had to do.


Which is way more effort than one has to do in high sec. That's the point.


Except for most of the time you can't use Local Chat as an intel tool against threats in High-Sec. You don't know how many of the 100 in local are Talos gank alts... in Null, your threat levels are given to you by default of what corp/alliance you are in.

Try harder.


are you really trying to say highsec incursions pose more risk than nullsec?

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*

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1456 - 2015-11-27 13:36:09 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Avvy wrote:

Risk in null can be low, the few weeks I spent there. The only thing that was a potential threat was the odd red scout checking out the system, so all we had to do was fly to a POS, report it and wait a few minutes until they left again. Which probably ties in with what was being said as the systems were very low population ones. So keeping an eye on local chat was all you really had to do.


Which is way more effort than one has to do in high sec. That's the point.


Except for most of the time you can't use Local Chat as an intel tool against threats in High-Sec. You don't know how many of the 100 in local are Talos gank alts... in Null, your threat levels are given to you by default of what corp/alliance you are in.

Try harder.


are you really trying to say highsec incursions pose more risk than nullsec?


Yea, he is, despite the fact that he linked a chart in another thread showing that more stuff gets blown up in null sec than in high sec (while nulls has the much smaller population to boot).

The 'high sec is more dangerous than null' lie is the self serving thing high seccers tell themselves to make their opinions be internally consistant (ie it's ok that things are unbalanced because high is more dangerous). It being mathematically untrue is no deterrent.
Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1457 - 2015-11-27 13:40:14 UTC
Stick to market selling mcalt

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*

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1458 - 2015-11-27 13:45:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Avvy wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:

Is there really a downside that some people will stop doing incursions if payouts lowered? probably only the vets who have ample amounts of isk will quit, new players will probably find something else to do.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but incursions are done by just random people working together.

Why would you want to stop something that brings players together?


Some of the best fun I've had in MMO's (due to the mechanics) was in Warhammer Online with their RvR (realm v's realm) when the sides were fairly equal (unfortunately not that often).


Lots of the "people being brought together" are folks like me.

this post on the previous page explains it way better than i can:

Davis TetrisKing wrote:

I don't think it's entirely about 'forcing them into places where I can kill them'. It's that for a lot of people who live in null, where logistics is a bit of a pain in the ass, and you are risking your assets a lot more whenever you're out it space, it feels wrong that not only is it less risk, but it also makes more isk to go to High Sec and run incursions.

I know this doesn't make sense to people who live in high sec. To them it just looks like nullbears hate high sec or something. But to nullbears the promise of null was that you need to put in effort to survive, but if you do there will be awesome rewards. Then we got out to null, found the rewards were ok, but that they were better back in high sec. So now a fairly significant number of nullbears make their isk in high sec running incursions and only really 'live' in null to go on fleets etc.


The above describes the upside down incentives of PVE in EVE Online today. It used to not be like that. When i started you could make a solid 30-40 mil an hour running missions in high sec, and you could live off it and explore the game with that. But if you wanted to get rich doing something other than station trading, off you went into the wild (low/null).

So we went. The CCP started adding new (jesus) features with poorly thought out and unbalanced rewards. All of a sudden, those of us who moved were like "wtf"? CCP even nerfed DED plexes in null then they made this change which was the last nail in the coffin. To high sec with alts a lot of us went, and there we mostly stay today.

Balancing how pve rewards work isn't about punishing high sec for choosing high sec (look at the numbers, most of high sec doesn't even incursion lol). it;s about freeing those of us who had put high sec behind us back into the places we should be playing. Null is fine if you get rid of a few imbalances in other parts of the game.
Aquilan Aideron
Wardecs go here
#1459 - 2015-11-27 14:06:51 UTC
Solution seems simple. Dont bring down higsec, instead raise nullsec?

Yet people crying about highsec shows what this trollfest is about.
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#1460 - 2015-11-27 14:10:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
Solution seems simple. Dont bring down higsec, instead raise nullsec?

Yet people crying about highsec shows what this trollfest is about.


Empty posts like yours are the troll posts. You are purposely burying quality posts with drivel to hide facts that you don't want to see. Please, if you have nothing to add then stop posting.

Edit: it has been explained many times why buffing nullsec is not a solution

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.