These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Nerf and Redistribute Incursions

Author
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#21 - 2012-01-06 00:45:26 UTC
Leelarja wrote:
And what good would these changes do?


risk/reward ratio fix
Endeavour Starfleet
#22 - 2012-01-06 01:01:44 UTC
They are fine as is. They do not need to be changed. The risk is huge for the reward.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#23 - 2012-01-06 01:11:36 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
They are fine as is. They do not need to be changed. The risk is huge for the reward.


lol at incursions being risky
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#24 - 2012-01-06 02:11:01 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
They are fine as is. They do not need to be changed. The risk is huge for the reward.


There is admittedly a risk if you fly 1bil+ fits, but anything cheaper than that gets paid back so many times over compared to l4s that it can't be described as much of a risk.

However, the way CCP has gone about incursions is exactly the right way. Income that is better than L4s, accessible to all users, and based on group only content, and big enough to discourage multiboxing as a standard preferred solution. L4s being superceded was better for the game than L4s being nerfed.

Incursions should be left as is, and further large scale group pve (imo scaled for capitals and including null relevant rewards), should be added to null.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#25 - 2012-01-06 02:19:14 UTC
Please tell me how there is any sort of risk in high sec pve.
Endeavour Starfleet
#26 - 2012-01-06 03:12:07 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Please tell me how there is any sort of risk in high sec pve.


I already explained the risks with hisec incursions. You can choose to ignore them if you want but there is already a big nerf on hisec incursions as compared to nullsec. They arent going to nerf them any more.

Some are butthurt because there is a way to make money that isn't being a meat shield in a nullsec alliance. And better yet it is social! And encourages group play. THE HORROR.

Changing incursions is NOT the answer. POS and corp modularity to encourage nullsec corps to recruit more and faction warfare changes will lower the hisec population. You nerf incursions and people will just go back to their lvl4 agents.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#27 - 2012-01-06 03:19:30 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Please tell me how there is any sort of risk in high sec pve.


You could ask a mackinaw pilot in gallente highsec that question.

ie - you represent an organisation large enough that it can blockade highsec resources if it chooses to, so the risk-reward for an activity in fact is partially represented by what your organisation decides to make that risk. if you decide to do nothing to impact that risk, then so be it.

As is the case in null, where great tracts of sparsely occupied wilderness with perfect local intel also carries no essential risk to the pilot beyond the npc's.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#28 - 2012-01-06 03:38:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Emperor Salazar
GUYS HES IN TEST, A 0.0 ALLIANCE, HE MUST REPRESENT THEIR OFFICIAL WORD. HE IS DEFINITELY THEIR SPOKESPERSON

you are literally saying that the risk is the potential for large alliances to co*ck block you

I don't even know what to say to that....thats not risk...thats just stupid
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#29 - 2012-01-06 03:42:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Emperor Salazar
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Please tell me how there is any sort of risk in high sec pve.


I already explained the risks with hisec incursions. You can choose to ignore them if you want but there is already a big nerf on hisec incursions as compared to nullsec. They arent going to nerf them any more.

Some are butthurt because there is a way to make money that isn't being a meat shield in a nullsec alliance. And better yet it is social! And encourages group play. THE HORROR.

Changing incursions is NOT the answer. POS and corp modularity to encourage nullsec corps to recruit more and faction warfare changes will lower the hisec population. You nerf incursions and people will just go back to their lvl4 agents.


Incursions could have been the buff low sec needed. They should have been low sec only, 100%. People would have gone and people would have made lots of money. With proper fleets and aggression mechanics from rats, properly setup fleets would have actually been pretty safe from the mean pvpers. Hell they would have become pvpers (similar to wormholers...ever tried to gank a properly setup wormhole fleet?). At any rate, riches would have been had, but with some real risk. And there would have been plenty of pvp.

As it is, incursions are just the newest safe isk farming venture in eve, ala raids from WoW.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#30 - 2012-01-06 03:47:14 UTC
As for the risks you outlined, they basically boil down to:

poor internet
crappy pilots
other incompetence

These aren't risks. They're just eve players sucking.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#31 - 2012-01-06 04:21:47 UTC
Some of the problems with nerfing incursions:

You can pull in 60m/hour fairly easily running level 4s when you get to the ships being used in incursions. Things that require groups SHOULD pay out more than things that you can do solo. [/irony]

Null/lowsec incursions already have payouts that make them extremely well balanced vs the highsec ones, moreso than pretty much every other aspect of the game. The only problem lies in the inability to force incursions to spawn in null.

It's way too late to reduce the frequency of highsec incursions. It's an aspect of the game that has a fairly large community, and killing off the only real group oriented highsec PVE isn't going to make people move on to other aspects of the game, it;s going to make them quit. Isk aside, it's something that offers a unique experience and simply removing it or making it unreachable for a large chunk of the players currently running them certainly won't do anything for the "health" of the game. Hell, can you imagine if CCP announced that they were going to introduce a patch that stopped all pvp, except for certain special "events" where players would be allowed to shoot each other every now and then?

Endeavour Starfleet
#32 - 2012-01-06 04:53:14 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
As for the risks you outlined, they basically boil down to:

poor internet
crappy pilots
other incompetence

These aren't risks. They're just eve players sucking.


Players sucking = Huge risk for you. Maybe not to Test or goons that are used to chickens running around with their heads off. But for limited incursion fleets with limited logi chain support is is VERY bad. Look at BTL Pub and you will find tales of people losing their pimped ships to a drunk logi pilot.

The vastly increased risk on your good stuff is what nets you more funds. Which are 60 percent (Already vastly nerfed) compared to nullsec.

BTW as for your stuff about not representing your alliance. You are not using a posting alt. You are using your main or whatever alt your in Test with so you are using that like it gives you authority on the subject. I don't know what rules your alliance has on that (Every one I have ever been in demands you use a posting alt) but when I see you posting as a main I take it as atleast the feeling from your alliance.

Because alliances are suffering from incursions. Now when they say "Join us for a 12 hour spree of defending someone elses station or TCUs or log the **** out" Members are saying "Okay!" and going for incursions on an alt. Alliances are not used to having anything but near complete control over their member's activities and now there is something that competes with their political BS known as "grouping"

So we have 3 groups that are against Incursions for all the wrong reasons.

#1 Fools on forums who have never been in a serious incursion fleet or watched BTL Pub for hours for stories: This is the majority of the calls out there. People who are stuck in a system with an AFK cloaker and want something to moan about.

#2 ""Shiny Fleet"" Incursion runners who are beyond care for other types: I saw this alot today in the BTL Pub channel and an in my opinion full of BS blog report on Evenews24. Their desire for Vanguard nerfing is obvious. Many HIGHLY HIGHLY expensive shiny fleets will almost always win a contest with any even well managed nonshiny fleet. With a nerf the nonshiny fleets will just about vanish and they will get to enjoy higher LP prices while the rest of EVE remains the same. Back to LVL4 missions.

#3 (And worse of all) Heads of Alliances I noted this earlier. Incursions weaken their grip of power over their members. This especially hurts those without proper SRPs (The ones that pocket moon goo funds or use it on a good ole boy club only) The bits about ruining logistics is BS. They have more than enough members to organize a very quick pop of incursions in their space. Many do not tho because introducing members to incursions could mean even less power. So they sit and whine instead.

CCP Knows this and this is why they will not be nerfed.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#33 - 2012-01-06 04:55:20 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
GUYS HES IN TEST, A 0.0 ALLIANCE, HE MUST REPRESENT THEIR OFFICIAL WORD. HE IS DEFINITELY THEIR SPOKESPERSON

you are literally saying that the risk is the potential for large alliances to co*ck block you

I don't even know what to say to that....thats not risk...thats just stupid


aye, so you don't want a conversation about the topic, you want to insult people. welcome to eve forums Tauranon, enjoy your stay Roll


They are public resource fountains in 2 or 3 public map published locations in highsec, with all the resources located on public beacons that don't even need to be scanned down. They are by design easily interdicted and harrassed, or even just smothered in competition.

I don't do them myself, but I understand that they can be closed extremely quickly if a fleet was dedicated to taking the motherships asap is deployed, at which time the isk fountain stops. As it stands, the INCOME available is simply based on bears agreeing to NOT destroy the mothership until withdrawal starts, you know - cooperative play between humans and all that.

You are in an organisation of thousands of people, some of whom have historically appeared to derive great enjoyment from highsec harrassment, if you don't like the state of the income of incursions, its within your grasp to do something about it, even if your corp/alliance management isn't involved. Hell I'm sure you could find 20 or 40 nullbears or whatever is required that LIKE shooting red crosses if that was the method of harrassment chosen. They would be well paid doing so, simply because the encounter they need to do is well paid.
Spineker
#34 - 2012-01-06 05:00:36 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
They are fine as is. They do not need to be changed. The risk is huge for the reward.


lol at incursions being risky




OMG I agree with Salazar! Ugh
Substantia Nigra
Polaris Rising
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2012-01-06 05:56:11 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
As for the risks you outlined, they basically boil down to: poor internet crappy pilots; other incompetence
These aren't risks. They're just eve players sucking.


Either that's a major troll effort, or you don't have a clue what risk is.

poor internet and the actions of other pilots **are** elements that contribute to the overall risk, and they are risk. Risk applies is hisec, lowsec, nullsec, and w-space. It's just the quantum of the risk that differs, not its presence or absence, and often the risk appetite of those who embrace it.

Different people accept or reject different levels of risk in different circumstances. This happens continuously in RL, just as it does in eve.

Risk:reward arguments are also a bit of a fail, because one person's perception of both risk and reward, in any given situation, will differ from another person's. The fact that others do not share your espoused view on risk or reward does not necessarily make you wrong.

The suckiness of other players, and of oneself, are most certainly risks and as such contribute to the overall risk.

I guess I am almost a 'vet' by now. Hopefully not too bitter and managing to help more than I hinder. I build and sell many things, including large collections of bookmarks.

Substantia Nigra
Polaris Rising
Goonswarm Federation
#36 - 2012-01-06 05:57:41 UTC
Spineker wrote:
OMG I agree with Salazar! Ugh


You forgot to take your tablets this morning, didn't you?

I guess I am almost a 'vet' by now. Hopefully not too bitter and managing to help more than I hinder. I build and sell many things, including large collections of bookmarks.

Spineker
#37 - 2012-01-06 06:01:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
Substantia Nigra wrote:
Spineker wrote:
OMG I agree with Salazar! Ugh


You forgot to take your tablets this morning, didn't you?



I forgot! the prozac! Big smile
Cedo Nulli
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2012-01-06 09:16:41 UTC
Nerfin the only enjoyable highsec thing in eve sounds like a bad idea. Im the kinda player that logs in 2-6 times a month due to time limitations, Incursions are the only thing that kept my gametime rolling.

They are social group action where you actually can go and find a fleet in reasonable time (in a proper suitable ship) and go do some isk and actually enjoy the game.

Ruining the highsec incursions due to dim ideas like "Oh yeah 100% of the incursion players would totally go to lowsec if they had to" would be very unfortunate. Those are the wet dreams of a guy sitting in some low-high gate waiting for some newguy pop in with a badger full of planetarystuff.

Going back to level 4 missions personally would mean a sub off ... I doubt any sane person actually enjoys grinding those over and over and over again all alone. Maybe im wrong and EVE is actually the hometown of foreveralone guys.
King Rothgar
Deadly Solutions
#39 - 2012-01-06 09:27:22 UTC
Set the isk reward for high sec incursions to 0. Problem solved. Double the LP to compensate if you like, I really don't care. But the raw isk needs to go. It's flooding the eve economy. That said, the blog post is pretty reasonable and well thought out.

[u]Fireworks and snowballs are great, but what I really want is a corpse launcher.[/u]

Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#40 - 2012-01-06 10:28:37 UTC
Incursions do indeed make isks at fairly low risk, but instead of risk you get competition.

Non-shiny fleet will take 10-15 minutes to do a site, while shiny fleets with good FC's with high skilled pilots could do them in 3-6 minutes.

With more and more people turning to incursions, the areas become more crowded while the number of sites available at a time remain constant.

People must compete over who gets the reward from the site, the winner gets paid, the other fleets that come in gain nothing for the work they put in.

To be competitive, most competent fleets will accept only shiny ships with atleast faction or t2 weapons and tank. Navy/Pirate Faction and t2 Battleships, T3 Cruisers, Command Ships, Logistics Level 5 and maybe 4 are the what is desired. If you're not flying any of these the chances of you getting in a good fleet is rather low. If you get accept you will mostly get accepted into a crap fleet with FC's who don't know **** and get everyone killed.

Now the next thing that is wanted is your fitting and modules. If you can't use Tech 2 weapons or atleast fit faction, you chances greatly drop from there, nothing looks worse than having a nice machariels with meta 4 or lower guns on it. Faction or Tech 2 Tank is mandatory, if you can't do that you are worthless as you will die.

Incursions will weed out the poor and skillless pilots and be run exclusively by the rich and skilled pilots with better organization.

TLDR: Limit only to ONE Incursion area for High Sec and reduce the number of sites available at once until the previous ones are cleared.

This will emphasis competition even more and prevent incursions from generating too much isk as it will fall into fewer hands.