These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Incursion fixes/feedback thread

First post First post
Author
Korgan Nailo
5ER3NITY INC
The Gorram Shiney Alliance
#601 - 2012-04-28 20:37:47 UTC
Corbin Blair wrote:
Maybe if you weren't trying to hard to stay in the newbie area (high sec) forever you'd be having more fun.

Is it that hard for people to understand that there are players who do NOT want to engage in PvP?

Oh wait... I forgot... usually low / null-sec players can't believe the others are not jumping into those systems so they can blow them up... ah... ok... ok... TOTALLY part of my view of "fun", being blown up... right...

Leave the High-sec players have their fun, go back to low / null and have yours. Geez...

--== EvE Online Quick Reference Sheet: E-Uni Forums Link / EvE Forums Link ==--

Apolyon I
Shadow of ISW
#602 - 2012-04-28 20:39:01 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Quote:
Bring vanguard sites down to level 4 mission (ISK/hr) payouts (per member of fleet).


Um, no. There has to be bigger rewards per person for bigger groups.


shouldnt group of 10 dudes running lv4 should get equal payout as incursion???
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#603 - 2012-04-28 20:48:58 UTC
Apolyon I wrote:
Takseen wrote:
Quote:
Bring vanguard sites down to level 4 mission (ISK/hr) payouts (per member of fleet).


Um, no. There has to be bigger rewards per person for bigger groups.


shouldnt group of 10 dudes running lv4 should get equal payout as incursion???


No, level 4 missions
-are easier
(ib4 hurr durr incursions are easy, level 4s are easier still)
-most missions don't have enough rat EHP to give 10 players in Incursion quality fits time to shoot at stuff. Bringing 10 guys to a level 4 mission just isn't efficient.
-incursions can be contested by other players
-incursions require more travel time, more specific fleeting requirements(a FC of some kind, logistics), and may not always be present
Alicia Fermi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#604 - 2012-04-28 20:52:20 UTC
Let us not beat around the bush. As an in-game activity, incursions are far healthier than missions. Incursions promote the use of dedicated logistics and buffer tanks. Compare with mission fits and their low-buffer local tanks.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#605 - 2012-04-28 20:55:42 UTC
Alicia Fermi wrote:
Let us not beat around the bush. As an in-game activity, incursions are far healthier than missions. Incursions promote the use of dedicated logistics and buffer tanks. Compare with mission fits and their low-buffer local tanks.


Indeed. If the only issue with them is the ISK faucet, just offer non-ISK rewards instead.
Apolyon I
Shadow of ISW
#606 - 2012-04-28 21:10:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Apolyon I
Alicia Fermi wrote:
Let us not beat around the bush. As an in-game activity, incursions are far healthier than missions. Incursions promote the use of dedicated logistics and buffer tanks. Compare with mission fits and their low-buffer local tanks.


omg, cus of incursion that the whole new eden has buffer tank and use of logistics.

noone knows how to use logistics and buffer tank before incursion, amazing!!!!
Thibault Etienne
#607 - 2012-04-28 22:39:29 UTC
Large Collidable Object wrote:
Remove isk rewards entirely, increase LP payout and stop spawning/despawn any sites once the mom has spawned.


yep agree completely

and get concord more efficient against suicide gankers in hi sec. It is meant to be high security space after all.
Nope I'm not a carebear I'm a trader. I go anywhere there's ISK but I can see the point of view.

It's a fact that not everyone wants to go null sec and PVP some people want to live in hi sec and do hi seccy stuff,and why not indeed.
Alicia Fermi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#608 - 2012-04-28 22:53:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alicia Fermi
Apolyon I wrote:
iomg, cus of incursion that the whole new eden has buffer tank and use of logistics.

noone knows how to use logistics and buffer tank before incursion, amazing!!!!

For many high-sec mission runners, yes, incursions have done a lot to promote the use of logistics in their game. These skills can be transferred more readily to other aspects of the game -- I call that a Good Thing. This is not the case with solo mission running; therefore, players running incursions is better for the game than players running missions.

There was a problem with the reward aspect of incursions but, as an activity, they are much better than missions. If I had to pick one to remain in the game then it would be incursions. Missions are terrible.
Daool
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#609 - 2012-04-29 01:41:06 UTC
Incursions were fine as they were, maybe just the 10% nerf to vg is needed.

Cccp has just been masivelly trolled by the whiners.

U can't just push sites into lowsec (much as the gatecamping hot droppers would love it)and buffing nulsec sites only helps the sov holder who farms them while forum trolling about anyone farming such sites.

Wake up ccp, u have just allowed yourself to be massively trolled into making these changes.
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#610 - 2012-04-29 01:47:57 UTC
I don't care about the pay nerfs, but the spawns are horrid. At least before there was occasionally the need to switch primary targets once in a while. Now you just blast the one or two jamming ships and afk your way to the end of the mission.

I enjoy incursions because they ere the only worthwhile group content you could just hop into and run outside of pvp. Though I enjoy pvp, I don't jump into it without a reason. Incursions were a fun fleet op. They weren't hard before, by any stretch, but now falling asleep during vanguards is a legitimate concern.

More ships, random spawns. Give us something to pay attention to.

"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."

Wyte Ragnarok
#611 - 2012-04-29 07:23:54 UTC
Daool wrote:
Cccp has just been masivelly trolled by the whiners.


This. And it's quite funny to see the effects it has had.
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#612 - 2012-04-29 07:32:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tallian Saotome
Daool wrote:
U can't just push sites into lowsec (much as the gatecamping hot droppers would love it)and buffing nulsec sites only helps the sov holder who farms them while forum trolling about anyone farming such sites.

You do know that nullsec sov holders have to clear them as fast as possible, since they have this nasty habit of shutting down all of our logistics and ability to deploy since they cynojam the entire constellation, right?

Incursions in nullsec are balanced, even if they pay out twice what they do now(I don't think they should) just because we cannot leave them there, they leave us too vulnerable in too many way.

Well, unless they spawn in some backwater constellation that absolutely no one ever uses.

Edit: I do want to say I wish I had incursions back when I was in high sec, they seem to be WAY better than mission running(by god, how many prisons does the 7 or whatever they are called have?)

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#613 - 2012-04-29 07:45:16 UTC
A nice buff for Incursions in terms of gameplay would be to remove CONCORD protection in invaded High Sec systems and add some mechanic for players to side with the Sansha. That would make for much more interesting and dynamic gameplay that is more in keeping with the spirit of EVE. Also, with genuine risk added, payouts could be boosted back up, otherwise I really think more nerfs are needed.
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#614 - 2012-04-29 08:21:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Kengutsi Akira
Korgan Nailo wrote:
Corbin Blair wrote:
Maybe if you weren't trying to hard to stay in the newbie area (high sec) forever you'd be having more fun.

Is it that hard for people to understand that there are players who do NOT want to engage in PvP?

Oh wait... I forgot... usually low / null-sec players can't believe the others are not jumping into those systems so they can blow them up... ah... ok... ok... TOTALLY part of my view of "fun", being blown up... right...

Leave the High-sec players have their fun, go back to low / null and have yours. Geez...


Yea cause you totally know all the systems in 0.0 have nothing nuilt up in them, no industry/military build up cause the 0.0ers wouldnt ever PVE

It shows just how easy those sites were easy to get rid of eh? Make em a bit harder (ppl have been qqing for that for years), randomize the spawns (again, careful what you wish for), reduce the payout 10% (thats the low/0.0 QQers that did that, all so they could go back to QQing about lvl 4 missions Roll If 0.0 has THAT much more ways to have fun and make money why dont you do THAT and worry about your own **** for a change?) and BOOM! "QQ INCUUUURRRRSIONS R DED!!"

Man Ive never seen a group more resistant to Hing the F U or ADAPT -ing RATHER than dieing since I joined this game.

Actually I remembered reading something that tickled my brain and I got it.

What was the Boomerang thing all good then suddenly declared a exploit?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-27-ccp-players-attempt-to-destroy-eve-online-economy-is-f-ing-brilliant

Quote:
Some players are worried the game will be ruined by The Mittani's Goonswarm alliance, but CCP promised not to interfere.

"I tell you what, it's going to be f***ing brilliant," Jon Lander, senior producer of Eve Online, told Eurogamer this morning. "Absolutely brilliant. "There was one bug [the 'bookmark escaping agro bug'] in the game that meant that if they do the things they're going to do, they could have escaped the in-game consequences. So we fixed that bug about three weeks ago. And they went, okay.


So, all of you who wonder why the Boomerang suddenly became an exploit? There you go

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes

CyberRaver
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#615 - 2012-04-29 22:04:45 UTC
The new incursions are god awful now, and not worth running, ruining one of the only truly social experiences in eve, take them back to how they were wave wise and implement a fer to payout amount by like 5 million, that brings them in line and makes them worth all the hassle and risk and investment
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#616 - 2012-04-30 09:12:55 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
The Incursion nerf has worse then decimated incursioner numbers at least in HI SEC. I predict AT LEAST a hexi- to pentimation of incursion runners & subscription losses. Dunno if NULL & LO sec will see same losses in incursions yet.
Good job on effing up yet another part of the game why don't you go fix wormholes and drive everyone outta there next?
CCP's touch is like an effing bull in a china store.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#617 - 2012-04-30 09:33:11 UTC
Welp, appears from the massive whining that highsec incursions may actually be balanced in terms of risk:reward.

Good job CCP!

Now just fix the industry risk:reward and things might be getting close to balanced Bear

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#618 - 2012-04-30 09:36:19 UTC
Kengutsi Akira wrote:
Korgan Nailo wrote:
Corbin Blair wrote:
Maybe if you weren't trying to hard to stay in the newbie area (high sec) forever you'd be having more fun.

Is it that hard for people to understand that there are players who do NOT want to engage in PvP?

Oh wait... I forgot... usually low / null-sec players can't believe the others are not jumping into those systems so they can blow them up... ah... ok... ok... TOTALLY part of my view of "fun", being blown up... right...

Leave the High-sec players have their fun, go back to low / null and have yours. Geez...


Yea cause you totally know all the systems in 0.0 have nothing nuilt up in them, no industry/military build up cause the 0.0ers wouldnt ever PVE

It shows just how easy those sites were easy to get rid of eh? Make em a bit harder (ppl have been qqing for that for years), randomize the spawns (again, careful what you wish for), reduce the payout 10% (thats the low/0.0 QQers that did that, all so they could go back to QQing about lvl 4 missions Roll If 0.0 has THAT much more ways to have fun and make money why dont you do THAT and worry about your own **** for a change?) and BOOM! "QQ INCUUUURRRRSIONS R DED!!"

Man Ive never seen a group more resistant to Hing the F U or ADAPT -ing RATHER than dieing since I joined this game.

Actually I remembered reading something that tickled my brain and I got it.

What was the Boomerang thing all good then suddenly declared a exploit?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-27-ccp-players-attempt-to-destroy-eve-online-economy-is-f-ing-brilliant

Quote:
Some players are worried the game will be ruined by The Mittani's Goonswarm alliance, but CCP promised not to interfere.

"I tell you what, it's going to be f***ing brilliant," Jon Lander, senior producer of Eve Online, told Eurogamer this morning. "Absolutely brilliant. "There was one bug [the 'bookmark escaping agro bug'] in the game that meant that if they do the things they're going to do, they could have escaped the in-game consequences. So we fixed that bug about three weeks ago. And they went, okay.


So, all of you who wonder why the Boomerang suddenly became an exploit? There you go

The boomerang maneuver wasn't a bug, and had nothing to do with bookmarks. Til very very recently it was upheld as 'intelligent use of game mechanics' when petitioned, as long as the ganker died. It was not til a ganker posted how it worked on the forums, and worked out a science of doing it, that the carebears learned it existed(it has been known about for years) and complained til it got nerfed.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Wyte Ragnarok
#619 - 2012-04-30 09:40:55 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Now just fix the industry risk:reward and things might be getting close to balanced Bear


THIS! Because it'd be freaking hilarious!
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#620 - 2012-04-30 09:55:44 UTC
Korgan Nailo wrote:
Is it that hard for people to understand that there are players who do NOT want to engage in PvP?

Oh wait... I forgot... usually low / null-sec players can't believe the others are not jumping into those systems so they can blow them up... ah... ok... ok... TOTALLY part of my view of "fun", being blown up... right...

Leave the High-sec players have their fun, go back to low / null and have yours. Geez...

Someone doesn't understand the concept of interdependent systems.

Besides... you know there are tales of people jumping into those systems and not getting blown up, right? I know, I know, it's crazy talk but hear me out. Some people right, they actually read a little about mechanics, ship fits and strategies for making ISK before going.

I hear they come back rich.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]