These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Drifter Incursions

Author
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#121 - 2015-08-27 11:41:51 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Why not make drifter incursions take over/destroy sov structures then expanding to nearby systems when one is overrun? Make them attack everything inside the system, explorers, ratters, miners, Pos, stations etc.

Add NPC stations and mission runners to that list while we are at it P
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#122 - 2015-08-27 11:58:44 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Ships are intended to explode in this game. Capsuleers are immortal, you remember? There is no such thing as suicide.

It seems like years of consequence-free PvE content as raised a cohort of players that have forgotten the first rule of Eve - don't fly what you cannot afford to lose.

Incursion runners are now going to lose ships on occasion, even if they do everything correctly. Just go get another one like every other Eve player has to from time-to-time. That, or go back to farming L4s until CCP gets around to revamping those as well.

I didn't look who's I'm quoting, sorry.
If "challanging" is oneshooting everything below titan, good for you. If I get shooted despite any action I perform, do you called that a fight? If reward will be greater than risk (losing ships to them) it's still stupid as hell. Obligatory loses? Propably new module/ship will come to deal with them.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Black Pedro
Mine.
#123 - 2015-08-27 12:12:25 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
I didn't look who's I'm quoting, sorry.
If "challanging" is oneshooting everything below titan, good for you. If I get shooted despite any action I perform, do you called that a fight? If reward will be greater than risk (losing ships to them) it's still stupid as hell. Obligatory loses? Propably new module/ship will come to deal with them.

CCP just wants to stimulate losses to drive the economy.

Losing one ship in a fleet does not make it not a fight. The rest of the fleet will destroy the drifter and the evil NPCs will be defeated again.

Players will find ways to beat these Drifters and not lose ships all the time. But on occasion, more than happens now, ships will be doomsdayed off the field by the Drifters.

I am not sure why people are having such a hard time with this concept. Ships can explode, even while doing PvE. If they never explode, how is that challenging? Sounds like that means the content has been well and truly beaten if you can never fail.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#124 - 2015-08-27 12:26:18 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
CCP just wants to stimulate losses to drive the economy.

Losing one ship in a fleet does not make it not a fight. The rest of the fleet will destroy the drifter and the evil NPCs will be defeated again.

Players will find ways to beat these Drifters and not lose ships all the time. But on occasion, more than happens now, ships will be doomsdayed off the field by the Drifters.

My first thought acutally.
Now imagine drifters can destroy assets on NPC stations and they are heading for Amarr...gates would be hot from jumps Big smile

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#125 - 2015-08-27 12:42:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Some of y'all are missing the big picture.

If you look at CCP's development of PVE content over the years, you notice a pattern: They make something, and that something is general built upon a high minded but ultimately unrealistic principle (like risk/reward being higher the further you go into danger, not understanding that many people will simply stay in safety and bleet on a forum about how they need mroe reward in safe space lol).

They will then see how things go, notice the unintended consequences. THEN they will put out a new version that learns from the lesson of the 1st thing. They did it with missions ,up to lvl 4s in high sec, 5s in low sec, pirate 4s in npc null, each level of mission haivng mroe and more battleship NPCs. They finally figured out that the problem with missions in dangerous space was that battleships took so long to kill that those missions became targets for people trying to force pvp.

So the fix was missions like the pirate epic arcs and FW missions and lately burner missions. Mission for fast, small ships that can survive in dangerous space and finish the mission quickly. And it works, people farm FW missions and low sec/null sec burners.

I think the same will happen with incursions. They made these incursions that resulted in very little incursion activity in low and null but great big whopping blobby blinged out incursion farming communities in high sec, because high sec is so safe and the incursions so predictable that risking a 5 bil isk ship isn't a risk at all.

So NOW they are making incursions that more resemble what the originals should have been: Desperate affairs for cheaper ships where losses are unavoidable but not fighting at all is a worse option (the original incursions changed the entire constellation to batop all other actvity, meant to encourage people to kill the incursion as soon as possible). You can't just bling your way to glory with a Drifter Incursion, you NEED to fly cheap as possible and be prepared to replace that lose. As others in this thread suggest, it might even been intended as a boon for the economy, because frankly, other forms of pve are so predictable and safe that ship losses are rare without outside player interference.

I take back my previous opinion of Drifter Incursions. BRAVO CCP, no you are getting it. For you nay says, just make a disposable Moa or Maller fleet and lets have at them Drifters.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#126 - 2015-08-27 12:52:24 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
I think the same will happen with incursions. They made these incursions that resulted in very little incursion activity in low and null but great big whopping blobby blinged out incursion farming communities in high sec, because high sec is so safe and the incursions so predictable that risking a 5 bil isk ship isn't a risk at all.

So NOW they are making incursions that more resemble what the originals should have been: Desperate affairs for cheaper ships where losses are unavoidable but not fighting at all is a worse option. You can't just bling your way to glory with a Drifter Incursion, you NEED to fly cheap as possible and be prepared to replace that lose. As others in this thread suggest, it might even been intended as a boon for the economy, because frankly, other forms of pve are so predictable and safe that ship losses are rare without outside player interference.

I take back my previous opinion of Drifter Incursions. BRAVO CCP, no you are getting it. For you nay says, just make a disposable Moa or Maller fleet and lets have at them Drifters.

Exactly. These feel much more like the original intention of the Sansha Incursions - group content that is challenging, unpredictable and perhaps even a little forced on you to shake those who just endless grind the same missions in the same place out of their comfort zone. Ships will be lost and stories will be made, more interesting stories than "I just made another 800M ISK last weekend doing the exact same thing I did the weekend before while watching Game of Thrones".

I hope so anyway. Let's hope CCP gets it right and sticks to their guns unlike last time the incursion community threw a tantrum when the ISK faucet was closed just a bit.

Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
#127 - 2015-08-27 13:02:31 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Exactly. These feel much more like the original intention of the Sansha Incursions - group content that is challenging, unpredictable and perhaps even a little forced on you to shake those who just endless grind the same missions in the same place out of their comfort zone.


Why should a sandbox game force anyone to do anything? If someone is happy grinding missions leave them be I say. If someone wants to gank miners in high sec, have fun. I'm sure some people relocate during Sansha incursions to continue their missions and mining thereby not forcibly subjected to content of which they have no interest.

I ask again Pedro, why would a sandbox based game force players to do anything?
Black Pedro
Mine.
#128 - 2015-08-27 13:16:04 UTC
Lex Gabinia wrote:

Why should a sandbox game force anyone to do anything? If someone is happy grinding missions leave them be I say. If someone wants to gank miners in high sec, have fun. I'm sure some people relocate during Sansha incursions to continue their missions and mining thereby not forcibly subjected to content of which they have no interest.

I ask again Pedro, why would a sandbox based game force players to do anything?
They aren't. But Eve is a living, breathing universe, or at least CCP is trying to make it so. There are good design reasons to mix things up, provide new content and opportunities for people to meet each other. If players want to flee from the incursion and set up shop somewhere else, there is nothing wrong with that at all.

But at least something is happening. How long can players sit in the same system running the same mission by themselves? Actually, we know this as CCP gave us some numbers on it - about 24 months. After 24 months of that players burn out and leave the game, while players that socially interact with other players, engage in conflict and the greater universe of New Eden stay much longer. Incursions increase slightly the chance of that happening and breaking solo PvE'ers out of the rut.

But Eve is a sandbox, play as you want. I think though that most reasonable people will agree that a universe where something is happening is more interesting than one that remains perpetually the same.
Anize Oramara
The Arch Dashing Dashers
#129 - 2015-08-27 13:18:08 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Some of y'all are missing the big picture.

If you look at CCP's development of PVE content over the years, you notice a pattern: They make something, and that something is general built upon a high minded but ultimately unrealistic principle (like risk/reward being higher the further you go into danger, not understanding that many people will simply stay in safety and bleet on a forum about how they need mroe reward in safe space lol).

They will then see how things go, notice the unintended consequences. THEN they will put out a new version that learns from the lesson of the 1st thing. They did it with missions ,up to lvl 4s in high sec, 5s in low sec, pirate 4s in npc null, each level of mission haivng mroe and more battleship NPCs. They finally figured out that the problem with missions in dangerous space was that battleships took so long to kill that those missions became targets for people trying to force pvp.

So the fix was missions like the pirate epic arcs and FW missions and lately burner missions. Mission for fast, small ships that can survive in dangerous space and finish the mission quickly. And it works, people farm FW missions and low sec/null sec burners.

I think the same will happen with incursions. They made these incursions that resulted in very little incursion activity in low and null but great big whopping blobby blinged out incursion farming communities in high sec, because high sec is so safe and the incursions so predictable that risking a 5 bil isk ship isn't a risk at all.

So NOW they are making incursions that more resemble what the originals should have been: Desperate affairs for cheaper ships where losses are unavoidable but not fighting at all is a worse option (the original incursions changed the entire constellation to batop all other actvity, meant to encourage people to kill the incursion as soon as possible). You can't just bling your way to glory with a Drifter Incursion, you NEED to fly cheap as possible and be prepared to replace that lose. As others in this thread suggest, it might even been intended as a boon for the economy, because frankly, other forms of pve are so predictable and safe that ship losses are rare without outside player interference.

I take back my previous opinion of Drifter Incursions. BRAVO CCP, no you are getting it. For you nay says, just make a disposable Moa or Maller fleet and lets have at them Drifters.

As Goons and nullseccers love to say these days, you can't change human nature and behavior. It's a nice little fantasy but why should a mission runner undock in a ship that has a high probability of exploding and join with people they do not know (in a game that is designed such that you can not trust anyone, even your closest friend) if the rewards are so much worse than what can be made by undocking in a ship that they know will not exploded and make much more isk? All you're going to get forcing people to do something for less pay or even negative pay is resentment. But hay if CCP feels that there's too many people in EVE then this could be a good way to remedy that.

To be honest what will probably happen is that as the incursions hit HS the payouts will increase(something something RP reasons) so that your traditional sansha incursion runners will be motivated to run them.

Give people a reason to do something that isn't 'make the beatings stop'.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3

Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#130 - 2015-08-27 13:23:58 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:


I hope so anyway. Let's hope CCP gets it right and sticks to their guns unlike last time the incursion community threw a tantrum when the ISK faucet was closed just a bit.



I remember the last time. They claimed that "it's not about the money, it's about the community!". But when CCP turned of the money,the community died lol. CCP had to un-nerf incursions to get people to come back. I was on these forums talking to the defenders of unbalanced incursions saying "but I thought it wasn't about the money lol".

People say they want excitement and danger and unpredictability, but that's just them not understanding themselves. What people really want is comfort and safety and predictability, even in a video game. That's why people freak out when CCP goes to fix things (not that every attempt is a good one of course).
Prados
The Old Comrades Association
A.W.A.C.S and Friends
#131 - 2015-08-27 13:29:39 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
I think though that most reasonable people will agree that a universe where something is happening is more interesting than one that remains perpetually the same.


The beauty of Eve, since the beginning, is that something IS always happening. The tools are given by CCP and the memorable content, at least since I started in 2004, is made by the players. I think incursions are fantastic as they bring together people from various corps and alliances, etc. But the content is still driven by the players based on the "tool" of incursions that CCP provided.

I also think CODE, or groups like it, is fantastic as it generates content. Hell, I miss Hulkageddon. EvE thrives on player created content grown from pushing the boundaries of the tools created by CCP. THIS is what makes it unique among MMO's.

Something is always happening in EVE; if you think not, then go make something happen.
Anize Oramara
The Arch Dashing Dashers
#132 - 2015-08-27 13:35:36 UTC
Prados wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
I think though that most reasonable people will agree that a universe where something is happening is more interesting than one that remains perpetually the same.


The beauty of Eve, since the beginning, is that something IS always happening. The tools are given by CCP and the memorable content, at least since I started in 2004, is made by the players. I think incursions are fantastic as they bring together people from various corps and alliances, etc. But the content is still driven by the players based on the "tool" of incursions that CCP provided.

I also think CODE, or groups like it, is fantastic as it generates content. Hell, I miss Hulkageddon. EvE thrives on player created content grown from pushing the boundaries of the tools created by CCP. THIS is what makes it unique among MMO's.

Something is always happening in EVE; if you think not, then go make something happen.

Unless you're in null sec because screw fozzie sov right :P

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3

Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
#133 - 2015-08-27 13:51:25 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

After 24 months of that players burn out and leave the game, while players that socially interact with other players, engage in conflict and the greater universe of New Eden stay much longer.


Can one not socially interact by being a member of a mining, industrial, mission running corp that has no interest in Incursions, PvP or low or null sec space?

I know a fellow, half way across the world from me, that has played over 10 years and never engaged in combat PvP. He rarely leaves his one small area of "home" space. He likes to make things, mine and run missions. He runs a small corporation with 30+ members. Those 30 members were recruited by him under those conditions. Most of his members are "solo PvE'ers" who do the occasional mining operation and sometimes run a mission with one or two corp members. He has members from six continents and the average time in game for his corp members is over 5 years.

I do not think the EVE population is as black and white as you think it is. I think classifying this play style as a "rut" is a bit insulting to those players. I think the game is big enough and varied enough to allow for all play styles simultaneously.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#134 - 2015-08-27 14:13:19 UTC
Lex Gabinia wrote:

Can one not socially interact by being a member of a mining, industrial, mission running corp that has no interest in Incursions, PvP or low or null sec space?
Of course that is possible. I am not sure why you are so defensive.

But there is a huge collection of "leveling my Raven" players who do nothing else but run missions by themselves or solo mine who end up quitting Eve early. Far from it for me to tell them how to spend their free time, but I can see why CCP would want to encourage them to engage more with the game and incursions are one way to do it. There is a small chance that if an incursion shows up, they might choose to join up with other players to fight, or if not, at least move somewhere else and potentially meet new people.

Incursions probably have a very low success rate at that, but it is better than nothing.
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
#135 - 2015-08-27 14:39:48 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

Of course that is possible. I am not sure why you are so defensive.

But there is a huge collection of "leveling my Raven" players who do nothing else but run missions by themselves or solo mine who end up quitting Eve early. Far from it for me to tell them how to spend their free time, but I can see why CCP would want to encourage them to engage more with the game and incursions are one way to do it. There is a small chance that if an incursion shows up, they might choose to join up with other players to fight, or if not, at least move somewhere else and potentially meet new people.

Incursions probably have a very low success rate at that, but it is better than nothing.


I would couch my argument not so much as defensive but more astonished. Astonished that people continue to think there is a proper or better way to play EvE. Also, I'm not picking on you personally it's just that I've been seeing a theme, and you're the one I chose to respond to. ;)

Some people will love the game and stay until it well and truly dies (soon (tm)). Others will enjoy the game for a few years or months and move on. I would suggest that that is more a reflection of their overall gaming style than anything else and that no amount of player or CCP created content will change this.


Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#136 - 2015-08-27 14:50:47 UTC
Lex Gabinia wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:

Of course that is possible. I am not sure why you are so defensive.

But there is a huge collection of "leveling my Raven" players who do nothing else but run missions by themselves or solo mine who end up quitting Eve early. Far from it for me to tell them how to spend their free time, but I can see why CCP would want to encourage them to engage more with the game and incursions are one way to do it. There is a small chance that if an incursion shows up, they might choose to join up with other players to fight, or if not, at least move somewhere else and potentially meet new people.

Incursions probably have a very low success rate at that, but it is better than nothing.


I would couch my argument not so much as defensive but more astonished. Astonished that people continue to think there is a proper or better way to play EvE. Also, I'm not picking on you personally it's just that I've been seeing a theme, and you're the one I chose to respond to. ;)

Some people will love the game and stay until it well and truly dies (soon (tm)). Others will enjoy the game for a few years or months and move on. I would suggest that that is more a reflection of their overall gaming style than anything else and that no amount of player or CCP created content will change this.




Your 'astonishment' comes from a misunderstanding of what is being said. No one is making any judgments about how anyone plays (and why people always thin this is beyond me), Black Pedro is just stating a fact, people that interact in certain ways stay longer, and if CCP is going to pick a direction to develop in, it's wiser to develop the game in a way that facilitates interaction.

The fact that you know someone that oddly stays tied to a small area of a video game isn't particularity relevant. No one is trying to tell him or you how to play, but rather we're having a discussion about how things really work in this game.

Also, the idea that nothing CCP does will affect whether people stay or leave is demonstrably false, monocle-gate proved that.
Daerrol
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#137 - 2015-08-27 15:24:16 UTC
Hey guys. This doesn't kill the sandbox. Fozzie sov doesn't kill the sandbox. Sandbox means you can go around doing what you want. If you want to engage this new content you can. If you don't want to, you can go to the over 2000+ systems not effected by drifter incursions and do stuff there.

No one is forcing anything.
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
#138 - 2015-08-27 15:27:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Lex Gabinia
Jenn aSide wrote:

Your 'astonishment' comes from a misunderstanding of what is being said. No one is making any judgments about how anyone plays (and why people always thin this is beyond me), Black Pedro is just stating a fact, people that interact in certain ways stay longer, and if CCP is going to pick a direction to develop in, it's wiser to develop the game in a way that facilitates interaction.

The fact that you know someone that oddly stays tied to a small area of a video game isn't particularity relevant. No one is trying to tell him or you how to play, but rather we're having a discussion about how things really work in this game.

Also, the idea that nothing CCP does will affect whether people stay or leave is demonstrably false, monocle-gate proved that.


I think a clear judgment is being made if something is referred to as a "rut" style of game play. You're statement that "someone that oddly stays tied to a small area of a video game..." is clearly judgmental. I think to them that is "how things really work in this game."

I agree that the major tenet of the game is player interaction. One must interact with players from something as simple as buying a T1 module to getting the last bit of ice out of the belt before the other person to full on PvP (combat and market). However, I stand by my assertion that a gamers play style is more about their personal goals than any construct in which they play. Those who focus on leveling up will focus on that in any game. Those who "grief" will do so in any game.

Monocle gate, WIS, Incarna gate, however you choose to refer to that is a many layered subject (pay-to-win, shiny new things over fixing broken mechanics, CCP arrogance, product delivered falling WAY short of product promised, etc.) Not to mention it actually is something that a large portion of people believed would drive more player interaction. Nonetheless, there would still be people that would never leave their pods and go walk about a station. I'd guess some people left because the ambulation never happened. See the constant push and pull?

Finally if it is a fact that people who "interact in certain ways stay longer" and Sansha Incursions have generated this interaction then why the negative attitude about them? And I don't care about the ISK argument, anyone playing as long as you or I has no trouble making ISK as needed.
Anize Oramara
The Arch Dashing Dashers
#139 - 2015-08-27 15:29:44 UTC
Daerrol wrote:
Hey guys. This doesn't kill the sandbox. Fozzie sov doesn't kill the sandbox. Sandbox means you can go around doing what you want. If you want to engage this new content you can. If you don't want to, you can go to the over 2000+ systems not effected by drifter incursions and do stuff there.

No one is forcing anything.

I think people are talking about the fact that (theoretically) if no one does anything the incursion will eventually cover all of K-space so there will be nowhere to go to, thus forcing you to either run the incursions or not undock.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#140 - 2015-08-27 16:15:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Anize Oramara wrote:

I think people are talking about the fact that (theoretically) if no one does anything the incursion will eventually cover all of K-space so there will be nowhere to go to, thus forcing you to either run the incursions or not undock.


A theoretical possibility, but not one that is high risk.

If it was a potential threat to those in low and null security, those of us in empire countering them will be able to make arrangements.

First off, is high sec will be defended. We will be down by khanid and figure out how to fight them and then push them back. If just impossible to get players and supplies to do so, I am sure CCP will tweak their power or else we will "find" new technology to counter more effectively.

With tactics and strategy, we should be able to start forcing them back. that will then come down to those that live in the lowsec/nullsec affected. Essentially you pirates can protect and scout for us incursion runners as we clear your space. So is interesting. If a problem in pirate space, pirates can clear them, or can ask nicely and those of us who specialize in drifter ops can do it as well. With of course the final site resulting in a big gank....

If that happens... well next one that pops up, you are on your own. An armistice so to speak if needed

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.