Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
868
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 11:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hey guys
We're looking into the Incursions right now. Our changes had varying degrees of success and this is my view on it currently:
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
For assaults, I think the NPC groups work fine as well, but the difficulty might have gotten a little too high.
Comments? |
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
202
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 11:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nerf 'em. Nerf 'em all to hell! 10% income nerf is just fine. Give more LP if anything. Target missions next Soundwave! |
Aidamina Omen
Aperture Harmonics K162
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 11:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
I am not much of an incursion specialist, in fact I have never run a Incursion site in my life. But what I've heard from other close to me that do run those sites is that the latest changes took a lot of excitement out of incursions. People don't just run incursion for the ISK but also because it's superior content in the fun department compared to say missions.
I would suggest to increase difficulty and up the pace of the sites. But don't spend too much time iterating on getting the perfect balance, because the main reason CCP gets so much heat about Incursions is because missions are boring to the point you want to stab yourself in the eye with a screwdriver.
As soon as you make other sorts of PVE more fun by letting them use superior AI or whatever changes you can implement will draw a lot of people away from Incursions again, and will create a more balanced view of Incursions.
I know this is probably not the sort of reply you are looking for, but just wanted to put it out there. |
Comy 1
Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.
121
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 12:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
I would like to see objectives that "has" to be done in the sites, or the Sanshas would get an additional support team to enter through a wormhole or something.
Say like the hacking in that vanguard site, just that **** is gonna hit the fan if you ignore it for too long.
But to stay on topic, give people more incentives to do the larger sites. |
NoxiousPluK
Abyssal Frontier Jovian Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 12:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Also maybe boost the low end Incursion PvE. For older players the Incursions are (or were, i did only do like 10 or maybe 15 of them) a nice income and a very nice training in having a buffer tanked remote rep fleet (PvP-alike).
For new players, there was not much ISK to make and having a fleet was not really required.
Maybe we need a frig-sized low skill logistics ship to make this available, but it would be fun if the low-end Incursions were more like the high-ends for newer players. |
Just Alter
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
89
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 12:44:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
We're looking into the Incursions right now. Our changes had varying degrees of success and this is my view on it currently:
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
For assaults, I think the NPC groups work fine as well, but the difficulty might have gotten a little too high.
Comments?
Comments? I'm speechless.
This is in line with last year "our userbase doesnt really know what they want, they'll talk with their wallets".
A part from obvious trolls or people who simply dont understand the the situation i havent seen a single person saying the changes you made were good in any way.
Before people start to whine "incursions need to be nerfed! they're an isk faucet!!" i want to make clear that i agree, in fact even people who run them agree(at least the reasonable ones).
The problem here is HOW you nerfed them, not the nerf per se.
The feedback is already on these forums, written by people more knowledgeable than me and more interested in the problem. I'll not spend half an hour trying to write a serious post analyzing the problem and its solutions and doing the job you're paid to do. Risking, in the end, that the post is simply ignored.
I'm posting here just to express my discontent on how you're approaching this situation. The problem is the same of last year: you need to actually LISTEN to the feedback and be more clear in your communication (i'm referring to the hidden assaults nerf).
I stress it again: listen to the feedback, do tests that simulate the average game experience.
|
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
869
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
Just Alter wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
We're looking into the Incursions right now. Our changes had varying degrees of success and this is my view on it currently:
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
For assaults, I think the NPC groups work fine as well, but the difficulty might have gotten a little too high.
Comments? Comments? I'm speechless. This is in line with last year "our userbase doesnt really know what they want, they'll talk with their wallets". A part from obvious trolls or people who simply dont understand the the situation i havent seen a single person saying the changes you made were good in any way. Before people start to whine "incursions need to be nerfed! they're an isk faucet!!" i want to make clear that i agree, in fact even people who run them agree(at least the reasonable ones). The problem here is HOW you nerfed them, not the nerf per se. The feedback is already on these forums, written by people more knowledgeable than me and more interested in the problem. I'll not spend half an hour trying to write a serious post analyzing the problem and its solutions and doing the job you're paid to do. Risking, in the end, that the post is simply ignored. I'm posting here just to express my discontent on how you're approaching this situation. The problem is the same of last year: you need to actually LISTEN to the feedback and be more clear in your communication (i'm referring to the hidden assaults nerf). I stress it again: listen to the feedback, do tests that simulate the average game experience.
I made this thread because the other one kind of degenerated into useless posts, much like this one. Please keep this to feedback about the changes to Incursions.
|
|
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Robotics Darkmatter Initiative
536
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
The only thing I can think of that needs a change,other than your proposed reversals, is the layout of the Nation Consolidation Network. Right now the fleet composition to clear them is different to the heavy long range sniper setups needed in the other two.
This has lead to some areas being nothing but NCN sites with fleets unable to run them due to their setup being tailored to the other sites.
Difficulty isn't an issue personally, I for one welcome more challenging group PvE content to EVE. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
PT109
Kontract Killaz
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:12:00 -
[9] - Quote
Reinstate the 10% in Vanguards........CHECK!!!
Reduce Assault difficulty.......DO NOT TOUCH IT!!!
Incursions are supposed to be difficult. The only thing I would change is to add a touch more randomness to VG's, especially if you reinstate the 10%. It gets boring after awhile |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
869
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:12:00 -
[10] - Quote
Caellach Marellus wrote:The only thing I can think of that needs a change,other than your proposed reversals, is the layout of the Nation Consolidation Network. Right now the fleet composition to clear them is different to the heavy long range sniper setups needed in the other two.
This has lead to some areas being nothing but NCN sites with fleets unable to run them due to their setup being tailored to the other sites.
Difficulty isn't an issue personally, I for one welcome more challenging group PvE content to EVE.
Yeah I'm not too worried about difficulty. Right now my main concerns are the length of assault sites and the payouts.
I just spoke to Affinity. While the trigger on a single NPC was a fairly awful mechanic, I'm not sure the current solution is as great long term as adding some sort of other objectives.
|
|
|
Riapsed Alvilla
La Familia Alvilla
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:17:00 -
[11] - Quote
Difficulty is definitely not too high. They need more risks! They're just boring now. Especially now you don't have to be careful about newer players shooting the wrong thing. Why not add more objectives in missions and incursions? Instead of this boring sit and shoot. Maybe a visible timer in which you must be quick and kill the whole wave or certain ships of the first wave before the timer runs out and the second wave is upon you?
- How about better objectives? Actually having to escort a ship through a asteroid belt or protect a damaged ship til its warpdrive is back online/repaired? Then you actually get to see the friendly NPC warp off!?
- What if you had a mission where you needed a fast ship in the fleet to tackle a fast npc ship. That if you didn't catch it in time (lets say in 30sec's) he would warp off to bring reinforcements?
-I wanna see a little Pop up window that comes up and says "Do a Barrel Roll!" lol ok, really though. Something like a little pop up window that comes up when the Commander comes on grid then speaks in a Evil Sansha/Russian Voice (That you can also optionally turn off) I know that was random but it would be cool.
It would add some flavor to the stale Npc missioning of semi afk / paying attention, while u watch T.V, switch targets, and click f1 again. |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1461
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Just Alter wrote:A part from obvious trolls or people who simply dont understand the the situation i havent seen a single person saying the changes you made were good in any way. Most of the complaining has been "I can't make enough isk!" and "It doesn't work the same way as before!" without any real criticism beyond the fact that *gasp* something changed.
Soundwave, you probably know I couldn't run Incursions if I wanted to. However I've talked to a few of the more level-headed people in the incursion community. The feeling I get from them is that they find the new sites tedious to run. They don't complain about the longer times spent in the sites or the payouts nearly as much as I expected; their big issue has been that the sites are now monotonous and unexciting. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
St Mio
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
767
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:21:00 -
[13] - Quote
Riapsed Alvilla wrote:(...) Something like a little pop up window that comes up when the Commander comes on grid then speaks in a Evil Sansha/Russian Voice (...) Reminds me of the message you get when the overseer in the Sansha DED 5/10 plex appears:
Quote:"When you wake up in your next clone, remember it was the Master's will that you died here today. " That was an awesome touch to the site :D |
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Robotics Darkmatter Initiative
536
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Yeah I'm not too worried about difficulty. Right now my main concerns are the length of assault sites and the payouts.
You're concerned Assaults are just the new VG's and going too quickly?
Quote:I just spoke to Affinity. While the trigger on a single NPC was a fairly awful mechanic, I'm not sure the current solution is as great long term as adding some sort of other objectives.
Just don't put in 0.0 tower bashing/FW Bunker shoots I beg you.
I'd be bold as to suggest things such as hacking towers, or blowing up complexes (small structures, possibly each with a wave attributed to them)
Alternatively what about defending something from Nation, such as a ship or structure (with the option, or even the necessity to have to repair it) and have the complex run on a timer? That way you've controlled the length of the site. The logistics will be dealing with the repair while the fleet engages hostiles attempting to blow up said critical objective. After x amount of time either help arrives (structure) or the ship you defended gets it's systems working again and warps off. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
Riapsed Alvilla
La Familia Alvilla
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:42:00 -
[15] - Quote
You're a cool dude. Thanks for the credit. Great minds think alike. Maybe we were writing at the same time ;) |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
1523
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
I think that the "kill the whole wave" was enough without the 10% nerf, so reverting that back sounds reasonable to me (and if it's still not enough, there's always the next patch to tweak it down 10% if needed; small changes are almost always better than giant ones IMO, especially in a game that's as dynamic and reactive as Eve is.
One thing I would suggest looking into, however, is Scout sites. I ran 2-3 a bit ago just for fun. I ran them easily in a Navy Slicer solo, but salvaging just one wreck gave me 3x the ISK that completing the site did. I would love to see them brought up to be more or less on par with lvl 4 missions, both in terms of difficulty and reward.
I think that doing that would make them decent content for lower level players in BCs and such. Making most of the spawns frigs or cruisers would probably help with that because it would make blitzing them solo in a BS less feasible and running a group of BCs with low/med skilled players much more feasible.
Yes, they would still be soloable by someone in a T3 or something, but it's impossible to make sites that younger players can run without making them soloable by older players. I think that making them comprised of lots of smaller ships that have to be locked up individually would make it more annoying for older players to solo them and cause them to just run blitz lvl 4s instead. |
Olenka Rzal
The Third Front
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:58:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
Comments?
+1
Agreed, as a long time incursion runner this would be a fine compromise to bring VGs slightly less nerf.
|
Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
152
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 14:37:00 -
[18] - Quote
I to would like to see an Incursion site that is geared more for the new player that can't get into the other ones because they can't can't fly a pimped out battleship.
Maybe a site that pays half of what a VG pays and has a ship limit of battle cruisers and below. I haven't run a Scout beacon site yet but I did do a few of the Scout belt ratting sites with another player last week to see what it was about and it was a joke. 50K ISK for that vs 8M ISK or so for a VG. I'd rather spin ships then do that. Are the Scout beacon sites any better?
Regarding the recent changes, I just hear mixed complaining. No real reasons. Last night I was hearing the OTA's just took too long to complete. I will say the last few nights the Incursion community has shrunk a great deal. On holiday. -áIn some other world. Where the music of the radio was a labyrinth of sonorous colours. To a bright centre of absolute convicton where the dripping patchouli was more than scent, It was a sun-á |
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Robotics Darkmatter Initiative
536
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 15:10:00 -
[19] - Quote
Lyron-Baktos wrote:I to would like to see an Incursion site that is geared more for the new player that can't get into the other ones because they can't can't fly a pimped out battleship.
Maybe a site that pays half of what a VG pays and has a ship limit of battle cruisers and below.
I've called for this several times now. Revamp Scout sites, pay at an L4 mission rate and limit the accel gate to T1 hulls BC and lower.
Right now Scout sites are useless, make them something newer players can focus on instead of rushing to a crap skilled BS to farm L4s in. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
153
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 15:22:00 -
[20] - Quote
I'm not sure noob incursion sites should be paid around the same as level 4 missions. level 4 missions mostly require battleships as well. But they should not pay the same as level 3's as those pay out **** as well.
very difficult to get the pay right as one person may be perfectly happy with the pay on one pve experience but then someone else, with the same ship and skills will hate that same payout On holiday. -áIn some other world. Where the music of the radio was a labyrinth of sonorous colours. To a bright centre of absolute convicton where the dripping patchouli was more than scent, It was a sun-á |
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
57
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 15:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
We're looking into the Incursions right now. Our changes had varying degrees of success and this is my view on it currently:
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
"Slightly" would be fine, no one wants to see wasted content, and the truth is (and despite the claims otherwise), people won't participate in an activity without a good monetary reason to do so.
Just remember what you've already done in other sectors of pve, and keep incursions in line with the spirit of the game, tha'ts all people like me are asking
Quote: For assaults, I think the NPC groups work fine as well, but the difficulty might have gotten a little too high.
Comments?
I don't think the Assaults are too hard, of course i fly with a super experianced team and the Nightmare is awesome (Tachs = best guns in game :) ).
A more fun way is to keep the difficult and add different/more objects as was suggested. Incursions/group pve content that are fun but not farmable is what this game has always needed.
|
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Robotics Darkmatter Initiative
536
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 15:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
Lyron-Baktos wrote:I'm not sure noob incursion sites should be paid around the same as level 4 missions. level 4 missions mostly require battleships as well. But they should not pay the same as level 3's as those pay out **** as well.
very difficult to get the pay right as one person may be perfectly happy with the pay on one pve experience but then someone else, with the same ship and skills will hate that same payout
Straight up L4 pay without salvaging and LP sales afterward isn't that great. Unless you hit a hotstreak with your missions the pay is roughly 20-30 mil an hour?
For younger players who need a means of making isk to progress up the incursion ladder, to afford the bigger ships and more expensive modules having Scout Sites changed to reflect the above and pay out that much would be justified. Yes L4's usually take Battleships (or T2/T3 cruisers) but they're also a solo income. Scout sites would have tighter ship restrictions that means you can't roll them over, and reward teamwork.
In my opinion teamwork should always be better rewarded than solo play, it's an MMO. I don't want to discourage solo play, but the best rewards should be through working with others towards a common goal. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
adopt
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
392
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:04:00 -
[23] - Quote
There's no such thing as too much difficulty, in all honesty make more Outuni's spawn in HQs and AS sites, they get way to boring. Regarding the VG nerf, change the income nerf from 10% to 5% (so its at like 9mil or something) and keep the dynamic spawns though. Shadoo > Always remember to fit Cynosural Field Generator I, have 450 Liquid Ozone in your cargo and convo a friendly Pandemic Legion member if you have a capital or super capital ship tackled.
FREE XOLVE ~ THE HERO TEST NEEDS |
Quontor Zarrkos
Bendebeukers Green Rhino
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:07:00 -
[24] - Quote
I'm quite a new player (like, 3 months old) and I recently started running those incursions. I have not been around before the nerf, so I don't have something to compare it with. I do however think that you should always remember that there's a lot more hassle to incursions then to missions. You have to move between systems (just made 20 jumps to get to the new incursion), you have to gather AND keep together a fleet (don't forget getting into one can also take some time), .... So they should surely offer a lot more money per hour than missions do as you lose a lot of time getting organized and ready to start. However, I agree with the nerf, as hitting more than 100mil/hr is just way too much. There are a few points I'd like to make:
- Buff lowsec and nullsec incursions, being there with your pimped ship is just dangerous, and you should either make (almost) double the income compared to highsec or make a bit more when using simple T1 battleships to do them. (to cover losses) Or you could make them more difficult AND more rewarding, like the complexes work.
- Buff vanguards a little bit but make sure you can make more money while doing the bigger sites, make it work like missions, the higher the difficulty and the higher the alpha damage from the waves, the more rewarding it gets
- I heard something about the bonus for the fleet commander, I think it's a really good idea to encourage more people to FC those fleets, we currently are a bit low on FC's and there are often a lot of (good) fits being spammed in the incursion channels just because all FC's are busy. Reward them for all their work!
I'm really, but really, happy about the random spawns, it is just too easy to look up the triggers on some random website and do those sites. Making random spawns makes the whole thing more difficult and less boring. Maybe the same could be done for missions? So you need to use at least a small portion of your braincells to complete them and can't just go to eve survival and check every possible detail of the mission.
As I said earlier, I'm still very new, so if some stuff I say here is completely wrong, just deal with it
|
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Robotics Darkmatter Initiative
536
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:15:00 -
[25] - Quote
Quontor Zarrkos wrote:and the higher the alpha damage from the waves
No.
Increased alpha is not an increase in difficulty. It leads to RNG oneshots that player skill cannot overcome or avoid, making a site difficult by forced death (in a game where death is the permanent loss of your ship) doesn't work. It's lazy and doesn't make for a challenging encounter.
There are many ways of increasing difficulty before you even look at the alpha. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
Herr Ronin
Malum Crusis
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:17:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
We're looking into the Incursions right now. Our changes had varying degrees of success and this is my view on it currently:
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
For assaults, I think the NPC groups work fine as well, but the difficulty might have gotten a little too high.
Comments?
o/ Soundwave
In the recent change's of Incursions it has made a dramatic change in the community's, As you would of noticed from statistics that Incursions aren't flooding the game with Isk like it did before the patch, Obviously down to many things, You increased the time of Incursions and decreased the payout for Vanguards.
Regarding the people that are saying "Carebears Cant Isk ***** Trolol" Well at this current time, Incursions are semi profitable, Yes you can still make 100 million per hour if you are in a community with high standards, For instance people have been "Blitzing" Incursions for Isk earning 1 Bill per day for what two years? Take that away and of course people are going to strike from OTA's that take 12 minutes in Public fleets.
I can totally respect that CCP are trying to make it harder, I will admit, It is stupid for the amount you can earn, If you triple box? Well it's insane.
Question 1: CCP stated that you were going to "Buff" Assault sites, You have nerfed them by making them longer to do, Stating in a Dev Blog that Assaults were going to get a buff to get more of the Incursion communitys to do them, Why lie in a Dev Blog, Didn't you state that Inferno, Crucible is all about the community? Well Lying or not posting correct information isn't a good start to Inferno. ( Maybe i miss read it, please correct me if i did. )
Question 2: CCP said they where going to nerf Vanguards, I do agree with them, But why nerf them twice, Now what i mean by this is you have increased the time to do them, Also you have decreased the payout, So in a way its a 2x nerf, Which just sucks, If you only did one of these things a lot of people would not be bothered, Due to this myself and a lot of people have just stopped doing incursions to see how CCP is reacting to the community and what change's are going to be introduced at a later stage.
OTA: Like people have been discussing, Bring the Hacking array closer, Nobody EVER hack's it, Its just nice to look at in the distance, In 2 years of running Incursions or since Incarna came out i have only seen it been Hacked twice, Maybe people hack it a lot, That is from my personal experiences.
By bringing it loser, You are making it more friendly towards people who do less DPS fleets and who cannot blitz them like ISN, SSN, SAQD and sUmmer, Vanguards would be awesome if you implemented what you saying and bring back the 10% pay or change the kill order.
There is some Feedback, I understand there will be people that will Flame at what i type, Feedback is Feedback.
Herr Ronin
ISN Management Of ISN - Incursion Shiny Network. Oh... What Does This Button Do...?
|
PinkKnife
The Scope Gallente Federation
94
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
Personally I think the payout on the longer sites should be increased, I haven't done the new VGs so I can't comment, but Assaults and HQs are much harder to arrange, not just run, it is harder to get the numbers and the right comp making it take longer.
The metric for completion time shouldn't be the duration of the actual site, but the duration from fleet startup. It isn't uncommon to only run 2 assault sites per hour if people drop out. Where as you can run 8 VGs an hour pretty easily. |
Quontor Zarrkos
Bendebeukers Green Rhino
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 17:01:00 -
[28] - Quote
Caellach Marellus wrote:Quontor Zarrkos wrote:and the higher the alpha damage from the waves
No. Increased alpha is not an increase in difficulty. It leads to RNG oneshots that player skill cannot overcome or avoid, making a site difficult by forced death (in a game where death is the permanent loss of your ship) doesn't work. It's lazy and doesn't make for a challenging encounter. There are many ways of increasing difficulty before you even look at the alpha.
Yeah, you're right, but what I had to type there was 'increased risk'. I meant it's easier to lose ships in those headquarters than it is in Vanguards (not taking into account the sometimes horrible FC's there).
PinkKnife wrote: Personally I think the payout on the longer sites should be increased, I haven't done the new VGs so I can't comment, but Assaults and HQs are much harder to arrange, not just run, it is harder to get the numbers and the right comp making it take longer.
The metric for completion time shouldn't be the duration of the actual site, but the duration from fleet startup. It isn't uncommon to only run 2 assault sites per hour if people drop out. Where as you can run 8 VGs an hour pretty easily.
^ Here you have a good point I wanted to make clear in my post, the bigger sites should not only pay more because they take longer to complete, the time before even going in there is very long. If you take as an average that people run about 4 headquarters before quitting, 10 people are leaving after every site, as a result, it takes a lot of time before you have the replacements on grid and ready to start the next site. |
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
85
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 17:15:00 -
[29] - Quote
mxzf wrote:One thing I would suggest looking into, however, is Scout sites. I ran 2-3 a bit ago just for fun. I ran them easily in a Navy Slicer solo, but salvaging just one wreck gave me 3x the ISK that completing the site did. I would love to see them brought up to be more or less on par with lvl 4 missions, both in terms of difficulty and reward.
this. i am one of the few people who like to fly around on my own and right now, incursions might as well not exist for me. providing some solo content other than missions and exploration would be oh-so-awesome. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
179
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 17:40:00 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
We're looking into the Incursions right now. Our changes had varying degrees of success and this is my view on it currently:
Making NPC groups dynamic and stopping blitzing works as intended for Vanguards. I'm considering reversing the 10% income change, to increase their value slightly again.
For assaults, I think the NPC groups work fine as well, but the difficulty might have gotten a little too high.
Comments?
The Vanguard OTAs are horrendous, tedius, and stacking like pancakes. When I do pickup fleets to teach new peeps and help lower skilled pilots over the hump I end up disbanding the fleet when the Constellation becomes 100% OTA's. The hi sec Minitmar Incursion is the largest Sansha Incursion I've seen with 5 Vanguard constellations. Last night 8 hours before downtime there were 5-7 OTAs in each system maybe 1 non OTA thruout the whole constellation.
The Assault NCS has become tedius and safer. Used to be the non unique ship spawn could fall on you at once! Tagging was a real challenge & all ships close & short would get into the fight because sometimes it was a fight for thier lives! Its was a fun challenge for me as a FC to manage those & they could often be deadly because the alpha often killed logi & we'd run on pure adrenlane after that keeping things together. Now it takes longer to finish becuase inevitably the close range ships wait around for longer periods of time almost like the old NCNs were the cruiser side nerrly always waited for thebattleship side. OCFs take longer due to the additions of more ships ( augas ) and are now the only site were you may see any real danger. NCNs I guess the cruiser side have less of a wait but it does not seem signiicant. I guess they are a little bit shorter.
I've seen such a drop in the armor community with the nerf have not really been able to be in more then 2 or so HQ's. The numbers dropping has made me think our community is on life support. Unintentional bug Working as IntendedGäó...-á-á http://i.imgur.com/aYOL1.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |