These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#101 - 2012-01-23 22:15:25 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
DO NOT listen to anyone who has taken great glee in destroying Incursion fleets, or destroying the potential income generation of so many.


What do you even need isk for anyway?
Jas Dor
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#102 - 2012-01-23 22:17:31 UTC
A statement of grievances

I remember when I first took my 125 man corp from low sec to NPC 0.0 in, god it was a long time ago, I think it was 2006. Sitting in council with the other CEOs of the alliance the feeling was almost palpable. My corp had only on trajectory to this alliance, to be merged with an existing corp and thus help sustain their flagging membership numbers. I have to say my corp outlived its CEO. At some point I just couldn’t take seeing drop mails from corpies who had been with us for years. I called it quits and turned the corp over to an XO who I probably should never have made a director.

Economics recognizes something called a resources curse. I once heard a politician in East Texas describe it as “when oil prices are high you’re a genius, when they’re low you’re an idiot and there’s not much you can do about it.” In real life resources curses enshrine failed governments and ideas. I have to say it certainly held true for null. The level of idiocy and fail I saw as a CEO and have seen since can barely be described. I think the non-faction Gallente blaster fit POS on a Dyspo moon pretty much summed it up. After leaving my corp I drifted through a couple 0.0 PvP corps. Most where simply empty shells. Identity and community came from the alliance level, not the corp level.

The game has changed a bit since it entered bittervethood. Wormhole space has become what low sec should have been in encouraging small community formation. Over half my old corp is now down a rabbit hole somewhere. That said I have the following grievances with the way CCP handles community.

1. The almost pathological insistence that there should be no community content in high sec. From recent statements it seems that CCP meant incursions for a small handful of players not as a way of sustaining a viable community.

2. CCP’s refusal to examine the NAV of Sov holding corps and compare it to the NAV of established non-sov/moon goo corps. If NAV > average non moon goo assets it means that a non sov corp cannot afford the buy in to 0.0 and must merge with an existing entity. A number of 0.0 corps are nothing more than predatory entities devouring smaller corps to keep up flagging membership numbers.

3. Unwillingness of CCP to analyze the outcomes of players entering an established 0.0 corp. How many are still in 0.0 in six months, how many are still with the same corp, how many are still playing the game?

4. Heavy on constant CCP subsidies to groups to community destroying entities. Moon goo is the obvious subsidy being paid by CCP to create large 0.0 alliances for marketing purposes. POCOs are another such subsidy (so were anomalies). This isn't a level playing field. You are giving isk to the group who is where it is now because back before invention one of their members landed a T2 BPO in the lottery, which got them into the null game, which became money moons, and now (possibly a couple corp names later) is the corp that we see.

In effect, CCP have declared that the only viable player communities shall be in null sec (and some in WH space) and are paying 0.0 entities to bring about this destruction. The question is not so much about incursion bounties as if a high sec based community will be allowed to exist. A number of 0.0 entities are threatened by this as, to be honest, their communities suck to the point that they cannot retain players if other options are available (and were only really being sustained by people wanting to be in on killing Bob/IT). The high sec incursion community has set articulated their desires fairly succinctly. Some nerfing to vanguard rewards is acceptable. Increased incursion difficulty (requiring the formation of stronger and more organized communities) is both acceptable and encouraged.

And of course null sec has responded that “you shall not have a player community that is not in null.”
Vistus Geyer
VSGY CORP
#103 - 2012-01-23 22:31:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vistus Geyer
just my opinion here but some of what I seem to be reading kinda looks like this to me "all it is, imho, is the null sec alliances are throwing a fit because those in Hi sec can make isk without having to travel to null sec to be victimized by them".

But I do agree that incursions should be fixed ..."note prior post"
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#104 - 2012-01-23 22:37:41 UTC
Joe SMASH wrote:
It's funny that people who run a valid site are called griefers. Once the mom spawns, anyone is free to engage...

Just because you don't want the mom to die doesn't make people who do griefers.



Go check eve news 24 they got a video there of the greifers... they were enticing people into MOM fleets then warping off in their logi... that's my idea of not running a valid site.


That said I recall the MOM site was once buffed & became invulnerable ( ie hits on it did 0 damage ) maybe CCP should bring that 'feature' back
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'
Wot I Think
Doomheim
#105 - 2012-01-23 23:08:59 UTC
Large Collidable Object wrote:
Remove isk rewards entirely, increase LP payout and stop spawning/despawn any sites once the mom has spawned.


This would work perfectly!
Arugas Koken
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#106 - 2012-01-23 23:14:33 UTC
Incursions are great. I got some good experience as a logi pilot before deciding to join a 0.0 alliance for some good fights (in the wake of the SC nerf and the imminent TiDi). There are definitely some problems though.

1. There are not the same opportunities in 0.0 to make such consistent isk as running hisec VGs. Sure the lowsec/0.0 incursions payout more but it’s not feasible to move from incursion to incursion like the highseccers.

2. It doesn’t make sense that VGs pay out so well when it’s exponentially harder to maintain the larger fleets for the more difficult sites (HQ etc). Nerf them.

Vanguard sites need to be brought in line with other sites and a way of making good consistent isk in 0.0 introduced to encourage hisec incursion runners to take the next step and move out to 0.0. Many wont as they are totally risk adverse or it doesn't fit their play style but some will if the isk reward is there.

One possible way of doing this is to introduce respawning sites (local npc pirates), using similar npc ai as incursions, to 0.0 systems that require fleets of subcap logistics/dps to complete. Should be very difficult to create a bot for 10+ pilots including logi/dps so shouldn’t be exploited like current sites and belt ratting. 0.0 Mining needs a big buff too.

I don’t think changing incursions to LP payout only is a good idea. I think it would cut the people running them down substantially which I don’t see as a good thing. Group PVE is better than solo pve. Must be better payout than running lvl 4s but lower than lowsec/0.0 income.
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus
The Initiative.
#107 - 2012-01-23 23:15:28 UTC
Mission is successful. Many thank yous to the incursion guys for sharing their ideas and input with us. I forwarded your ideas to CCP. Even more thanks to the pilots who come out and destroy the Motherships time after time. YOU guys applied the pressure to force meaningful dialogue. The players made this happen for their own reasons.//

I do not think that we should be able to form up 40 guys and deny content for thousands of people day after day. I think that no group of players should have that much power over so many people, by exerting such little effort.

Pretty sure no one will believe me on this next point, but here goes anyway. I also wanted to do my part to try to ensure that the nerf/changes to Incursions were not too extreme against Incursions, nor too light. Telling you guys "I did this to help you" will doubtless be received a either a troll or a slap in the face to the uninformed.

I am linking some of the dialogue I had with a few of the luminaries from BTL/TDF. I had 20+ conversations with the folks who organize a large portion of Incurions but the most productive/informative one is linked here.
Hopefully we will see Incursions get rebalanced fairly and in a way that the majority of players agree with-both Incursion runners and the rest of Eve. It was necessary to halt incursions to force meaningful dialogue, and with luck everything will turn out for the best for as many players as possible.

Skunkworks, Kill It With Fire, Brick volunteers, the good people who joined our fleets and Krissada: My sincere thanks, what you have been able to accomplish is almost unprecedented in Eve. I stand in awe of your combined efforts and leadership. See you in fleet on Tuesday?

Hmmm
Wyte Ragnarok
#108 - 2012-01-23 23:45:27 UTC
Darius III wrote:
here.

That was certainly an interesting read. I like the idea of a system going from Vanguards -> Assaults -> Special HQ -> Lockdown, then a mom might spawn and end incursion. Nice idea there.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#109 - 2012-01-23 23:51:02 UTC
Darius III wrote:
Psychopathic crap


You speak for no one who runs Incursions.
And given your past tag lines where you slag CCP ad nauseam, I doubt they will listen to you either.
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#110 - 2012-01-23 23:56:52 UTC
Jas Dor wrote:
A statement of grievances

I remember when I first took my 125 man corp from low sec to NPC 0.0 in, god it was a long time ago, I think it was 2006. Sitting in council with the other CEOs of the alliance the feeling was almost palpable. My corp had only on trajectory to this alliance, to be merged with an existing corp and thus help sustain their flagging membership numbers. I have to say my corp outlived its CEO. At some point I just couldn’t take seeing drop mails from corpies who had been with us for years. I called it quits and turned the corp over to an XO who I probably should never have made a director.

Economics recognizes something called a resources curse. I once heard a politician in East Texas describe it as “when oil prices are high you’re a genius, when they’re low you’re an idiot and there’s not much you can do about it.” In real life resources curses enshrine failed governments and ideas. I have to say it certainly held true for null. The level of idiocy and fail I saw as a CEO and have seen since can barely be described. I think the non-faction Gallente blaster fit POS on a Dyspo moon pretty much summed it up. After leaving my corp I drifted through a couple 0.0 PvP corps. Most where simply empty shells. Identity and community came from the alliance level, not the corp level.

The game has changed a bit since it entered bittervethood. Wormhole space has become what low sec should have been in encouraging small community formation. Over half my old corp is now down a rabbit hole somewhere. That said I have the following grievances with the way CCP handles community.

1. The almost pathological insistence that there should be no community content in high sec. From recent statements it seems that CCP meant incursions for a small handful of players not as a way of sustaining a viable community.

2. CCP’s refusal to examine the NAV of Sov holding corps and compare it to the NAV of established non-sov/moon goo corps. If NAV > average non moon goo assets it means that a non sov corp cannot afford the buy in to 0.0 and must merge with an existing entity. A number of 0.0 corps are nothing more than predatory entities devouring smaller corps to keep up flagging membership numbers.

3. Unwillingness of CCP to analyze the outcomes of players entering an established 0.0 corp. How many are still in 0.0 in six months, how many are still with the same corp, how many are still playing the game?

4. Heavy on constant CCP subsidies to groups to community destroying entities. Moon goo is the obvious subsidy being paid by CCP to create large 0.0 alliances for marketing purposes. POCOs are another such subsidy (so were anomalies). This isn't a level playing field. You are giving isk to the group who is where it is now because back before invention one of their members landed a T2 BPO in the lottery, which got them into the null game, which became money moons, and now (possibly a couple corp names later) is the corp that we see.

In effect, CCP have declared that the only viable player communities shall be in null sec (and some in WH space) and are paying 0.0 entities to bring about this destruction. The question is not so much about incursion bounties as if a high sec based community will be allowed to exist. A number of 0.0 entities are threatened by this as, to be honest, their communities suck to the point that they cannot retain players if other options are available (and were only really being sustained by people wanting to be in on killing Bob/IT). The high sec incursion community has set articulated their desires fairly succinctly. Some nerfing to vanguard rewards is acceptable. Increased incursion difficulty (requiring the formation of stronger and more organized communities) is both acceptable and encouraged.

And of course null sec has responded that “you shall not have a player community that is not in null.”



So far this is the only post that is close to the base issues .
Faelyn L'Darcassan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#111 - 2012-01-24 00:12:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Faelyn L'Darcassan
Let us not only see incursions as the ISK making cow they are now, but examine their role-playing aspects too…
Incursions should be major events with lasting effects not a one day thing and another mom popped. We do not see major real world factions start major invasions every 24 hours after all… neither do we see a war/invasion without lasting long term effects on a particular region. E.g. make new incursions ‘spawn’ only once a week or dynamically based on how much incursions are run.

Suggested short term effects on the incursion constellation:
- The usual Sansha penalties should still apply
- Sansha spawn and attack players in every system – at gates, stations, belts, even off-grid after a while (off-grid); gate/station guns are offline (you don’t want to take a Charon in there alone)
- Security status of the systems drops by a fixed amount, e.g. a 0.5 system would get 0.5-0.3=0.2 security but still be a high sec system just with VERY slow concord response as in a 0.2 system (surely there is a formula for concord response times that could be adapted)
- Station systems are affected, e.g. doubling session change timers

Suggested long term effects on the incursion region (incentives to kill incursions sooner than later):
- Impose a long-term cumulative faction/concord tax on everything in the affected region, e.g. for a month (max. incursion duration), depending on how long the incursion was present and whether the mom was killed or not (for bounties, market orders, contracts). I.e. make everybody in that region feel the pain.
E.g. 0.5%*Days(Mobilizing) + 1%*Days(Established)*ratio + 0.25%*Days(Withdrawing) tax, where ratio is computed based on Sansha killings in the establishment phase. Halve the tax, if the mom is killed and of course make it cumulative over time, i.e. more incursions in region = more tax.

Suggested incursion changes:
- Use the three incursion phases – mobilizing, established, withdrawing to adjust site difficulty, payouts and respawn rate (high influence = high respawn, payouts and difficulty).
- Spawn multiple site classes per system, do not lock a specific system to vanguard/assault/hq; if site difficulty needs to be locked, make it an upper cap, not the only site class spawned.
- Make payouts mostly (if not exclusively) LPs – we save the galaxy, not our wallets, right? When did Luke Skywalker ever receive money for saving the galaxy? (or make the ISK payouts directly related to influence, zero influence = zero ISK, keeping LPs normal)
- Rebalance incursion sites (dynamic difficulty and payout per effort spent, e.g. mission rewards decrease if some mission is completed very quickly, right?):
Scouts ~ L3+ missions with smart AIs (all ewar, perhaps except jam to keep rookies alive)
Vanguards ~ L5+ missions or C4+ wormholes with smarter AIs (all ewar as in pvp)
Assaults ~ C5+ wormholes (the slugfest begins)
HQ ~ C6+ wormholes (you need guts to even warp into one of these)
MOM ~ C6+capital escalations (there IS a supercarrier in there, right?)

Mobilizing [max. 7 days]: influence grows from 0 to 100, slowed down by anyone running sites; with growing influence so do the penalties and rewards (e.g. make influence a modifier for payouts), sites spawn more often, difficulty (e.g. variability) of sites grows. Spawns mostly scouts and vanguards, some assaults/hqs based on influence.

Established [max. 14 days]: when influence reaches maximum, the mothership spawns and brings in major reinforcements – site difficulty get a major boost depending on how many sites were run during the establishment phase (e.g. double the number of ships – they have reinforcements after all, or less if many Sansha were killed before); site respawn rate reaches maximum, influence now drops when sites are run. Spawns some scouts and vanguards, mostly assaults and HQs. The difficulty boost is void once the mom is killed or off field.

Withdrawing [max. 7 days]: Sansha withdraw once the mom is destroyed, after mom warps off (e.g. after accomplishing their deeds or when influence drops below 25%); influence is dropping constantly, completing sites drops it further; when it reaches 0, the incursion is gone (notice that the incursion is still there after the mom is killed); Spawns scattered scouts and vanguards, some assaults.
Surge Roth
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#112 - 2012-01-24 01:05:32 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
CCP, for goodness sakes, DO NOT listen to any of the incursion haters.

CCP, ask directly the leadership of BTL and TDF about what changes are needed, if any.
DO NOT listen to anyone who has taken great glee in destroying Incursion fleets, or destroying the potential income generation of so many.

Clearly listening to the elitist heads of the ISK farmers is the right way to go. Roll

I'm sure they have the game's best interest in mind, not their own pockets.


The same can be said about the csm.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#113 - 2012-01-24 01:20:54 UTC
Vote for someone else then. Since coordination and planning got CCP to open this thread, it would appear to work. Or don't coordinate, don't vote, and complain endlessly when you're not represented.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#114 - 2012-01-24 01:37:30 UTC
There really needs to be a more challenging 'Scout' site that those in non T3/Super shiney BS & logi can run which doesnot pay a 50k isk / 50lp pittance... maybe like a lyavite mining site which only mining & frig ships have access too to sell to the NMC runners or other Scout sites with MTACs & civilians which other sites can use 
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'
EI7FPB 3
EI7FPB Ltd
#115 - 2012-01-24 01:44:20 UTC
Here is how I would change the Incursions.

  • 1. Increase the pay out on the scout sites, and put gate on the sites, limit the size of the ships that can enter, to Battlecruisers and below.
  • 2. Leave the Vanguards alone ( for now, more on this later ).
  • 3. Increase the pay out on the Assault sites ( for now, more on this later ).
  • 4. Have the Sansha‘s Nation flagship ( The Boss, Mom site ) spawn after a few days.


Here is what I hope will happen after this changes.

  • 1. Non-Incursion players can start to do Incursion. Level 3 & 4 Missions runners can use their mission ships, earn the ISK needed to buy a Shiny ship, and move to Vanguards.
  • 2. Vanguards are very important, this is where you learn Fleet warfare ( ie working as a team ). Because of all the new players running Incursions, Vanguards will become overcrowded ( Very important, Next ).
  • 3. Assault Fleet take too long get going, They need MORE players ( Good Vanguard Pilots ).
  • 4. The Mom site, this is no easy fix. Incursion runners don’t want this site to spawn for at least a week or 2. Yes, we need the incursion to finish, so we get our LP’s. Non- Incursion players want the Incursion to go away ASAP.


How about having a fixed Incursion Region, with a few gates into each of the Hisec Regions, ( A second map. ), Pilots with a Security Status > 0 can NOT enter, CONCORD Sovereignty, each Faction can have a few stations in the Region, We will setup our own market hub. LP’s could be paid out at downtime, each day ( NO END TO THE INCURSION ) .

Pvpers have their own part of EVE space ( Lowsec & Nullsec ), So why can’t Incursion runners have a safe place to run incursions, away for the Grievers, any pilot who’s Security Status falls below 0 will be transported to HIsec, ( No IF’s, AND’s or BUT’s ).

Any player who says “Decrease the payouts” Dose not understand Incursions, Most Incursion runners spend their ISK as fast as they get it. For me, Incursions are about Team work ( been in fleets with other players, Not mining or missioning solo, I make lots of ISK that way Big smile ), running contests, and having FUN, messing on COMMs, the ISK is good to, but I spend it as fast as I get it.

SHINY SHIPs and MODS: The big problem with Faction ships and Equipment is that NOBODY can build them, the ISK that Incursion runners make dose NOT filter out to other players.
How about SHINY Battlecruisers.

Incursion running is new to EVE ( The best part of the game, in my opinion ), it need time to grow and change.

The CSM need to stay in Nullsec, and out of Incursions. The real discussion about Incursion happens on COMMs ( That where the Incursion runners are ) and NOT on the form.
Fearless M0F0
Incursion PWNAGE Asc
#116 - 2012-01-24 01:50:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Fearless M0F0
My little things:

- Quickest and maybe simplest way to "balance" vanguard blitzing is by tweaking the reward curve: just cut number of max pilots that get max reward a little (i.e. over 8 pilots in fleet you get 50%, 10 pilots you get nothing).
- In assaults: Nation Consolidation Network is way too time consuming compared to other assaults, quickest way to "fix" this would be to remove one or more rooms we need to go through in split fleets to reach final room.
- In HQ: Remove requirement to drop MTAC to shoot tower in True Creation Research Center.

A little bigger things:
- Put some sort of restriction in spawn algorithm to prevent a system from having only the same type of site (6 OTAs, 6 NCN, 6 True Creation Research). This hurts a lot in Assaults and HQ when there are only NCN and TCRC sites.
- Make finishing vanguards have less effect in reducing influence, like 1/4 of what it does now. The idea is to balance it to the point where it would be close to impossible to get influence down to 0 by just doing vanguards. Force us to run Assault/HQ fleets to get to the MOM.

And so we can harvest some moar griever tears: Put a timer on MOM spawn, make it spawn 1-3 days AFTER the influence has reached 0. Twisted
Shinzhi Xadi
Doomheim
#117 - 2012-01-24 01:59:16 UTC
EI7FPB 3 wrote:
Here is how I would change the Incursions.

  • 1. Increase the pay out on the scout sites, and put gate on the sites, limit the size of the ships that can enter, to Battlecruisers and below.
  • 2. Leave the Vanguards alone ( for now, more on this later ).
  • 3. Increase the pay out on the Assault sites ( for now, more on this later ).
  • 4. Have the Sansha‘s Nation flagship ( The Boss, Mom site ) spawn after a few days.


Here is what I hope will happen after this changes.

  • 1. Non-Incursion players can start to do Incursion. Level 3 & 4 Missions runners can use their mission ships, earn the ISK needed to buy a Shiny ship, and move to Vanguards.
  • 2. Vanguards are very important, this is where you learn Fleet warfare ( ie working as a team ). Because of all the new players running Incursions, Vanguards will become overcrowded ( Very important, Next ).
  • 3. Assault Fleet take too long get going, They need MORE players ( Good Vanguard Pilots ).
  • 4. The Mom site, this is no easy fix. Incursion runners don’t want this site to spawn for at least a week or 2. Yes, we need the incursion to finish, so we get our LP’s. Non- Incursion players want the Incursion to go away ASAP.


How about having a fixed Incursion Region, with a few gates into each of the Hisec Regions, ( A second map. ), Pilots with a Security Status > 0 can NOT enter, CONCORD Sovereignty, each Faction can have a few stations in the Region, We will setup our own market hub. LP’s could be paid out at downtime, each day ( NO END TO THE INCURSION ) .

Pvpers have their own part of EVE space ( Lowsec & Nullsec ), So why can’t Incursion runners have a safe place to run incursions, away for the Grievers, any pilot who’s Security Status falls below 0 will be transported to HIsec, ( No IF’s, AND’s or BUT’s ).

Any player who says “Decrease the payouts” Dose not understand Incursions, Most Incursion runners spend their ISK as fast as they get it. For me, Incursions are about Team work ( been in fleets with other players, Not mining or missioning solo, I make lots of ISK that way Big smile ), running contests, and having FUN, messing on COMMs, the ISK is good to, but I spend it as fast as I get it.

SHINY SHIPs and MODS: The big problem with Faction ships and Equipment is that NOBODY can build them, the ISK that Incursion runners make dose NOT filter out to other players.
How about SHINY Battlecruisers.

Incursion running is new to EVE ( The best part of the game, in my opinion ), it need time to grow and change.

The CSM need to stay in Nullsec, and out of Incursions. The real discussion about Incursion happens on COMMs ( That where the Incursion runners are ) and NOT on the form.


Best post here ! CCP read this!
JusFooling Around
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#118 - 2012-01-24 02:19:10 UTC
Darius, I hope you are speaking from your "I'm a concerned CSM" mouth and not your pirate mouth. I'm not convinced
that is a difference with any distinction, but I have an open mind.

The necessity to refine incursions is not disputed by most, if any, incursion regulars. Nonetheless, this is the
internet, thus the nature of the needed refinements is in great dispute. In fairness to CCP (my sig does not insult
them) it is rare for any organization to launch a major feature without refinements needed down the road.

I dispute your basic tenet concerning the risk/reward paradigm in hisec being broken. (Why it might be broken in
only one arena is a discussion outside of the limited scope of this post.)

The risk/reward paradigm is not broken by demonstrated skill, or preparedness, Your loss of a 1.6 billion ship in
the pursuit of a 128 million reward is proof that risk exists. I know people will attempt to sidetrack this
discussion away from its core by arguing your reward was tears or whatever - the basic fact persists, your risk of
isk in the form of a 1.6 billion ship was lost when the potential gain of isk was 128 million. Risking one entity
to gain an ideal or different entity are very different risk/reward paradigms than the one being held out as broken,
isk risk vs isk reward. Braggards at this point will begin to argue that losing 1.6 billion is nothing, but that is
not the experience of most players. The numbers are quite persistent.

Your loss of 1.6 billion, for whatever reason... lack of skill, lack of preparedness, lack of fleet efficiency, poor
planning, poor execution... whatever reason, does not change the numbers and remains proof that risk exists.

The risk/reward paradigm is not broken by demonstrated skill. That paradigm does not include a certainty of loss,
only a risk of loss. You proved that risk exists.

I know your defenders have been quick to point out that you failed to fit your ship properly, even though it is
true, that does not break the risk/reward paradigm. Regardless of how foolish or skilled a pilot may be has nothing
to do with the presence of a risk far greater than the presence of a potential reward.

In looking at the circumstances around your loss, it is important to consider that sansha was dividing its DPS
between two fleets instead of the usual one. That means twice as many ships, a subsantially larger force than
normal was opposing the sansha. Strength does come in numbers, but in all forms of combat the rule stating that
stupidity is a self correcting problem remains. All of the ship losses from your fleet prove risk exists, and even
moreso for the unprepared or unskilled. This engagement proves that even when the player force is doubled and the
possibility of any reward is halved, risk can still take it's victims.

Darius, I hope you keep your word about ceasing and desisting your contribution to having a very small number of
players having some form of control over so many others by assisting in denying so many others a major feature of
the game. Further, I hope you wield enough leadership to the other's whose cause you joined to have them follow
your lead in this new, and I think, correct direction.

You have a lot at stake, are you really a leader or just a bugle?
Razin
The Scope
#119 - 2012-01-24 02:19:55 UTC
Sansha needs to camp gates in hi-sec Incursion systems.
JusFooling Around
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2012-01-24 02:27:39 UTC
CCP had gate camping NPC in lower hisec systems long ago and got rid of that.