Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
334
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 12:55:00 -
[31] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I counter with the suggestion that L4s be moved to lowsec instead. /sign
To achieve what exactly?
Did you know there are L4 agents in lowsec already?
Quote:A large number of the lvl5's are old lvl4's. They moved the most difficult ones to low-sec only and named them lvl5
Although I dont believe in the "move all lvl4 missions to lowsec" argument and dismiss it as a ploy for nullsec cartels to gain more taxable citizens, I do believe the current set of lvl4's give an average player enough ISK to enjoy this game.
The way it is now, lvl5's provide an excellent income source for lowsec dwellers capable of running them. I think the added risk of getting dropped or otherwise interrupted should remain a part of running those lvl5's as it sets those missions apart from the others and allow for a different gaming-experience.
I didn't know that. Interesting. It happened in 2010 so I was definitely around for it but probably not aware of the issue as I didn't go on the forums at the time.
There are for example an astounding 3 level 5 cal navy agents. 1 is in a FW constellation. The other is in the Vale entrance pocket. I get that pirates "need" an income but this is ridiculous. It's not even like they're evenly distributed. If one of those agents was moved to say, Dantumi or Ishomilken then I might find the various arguments about pirates using them as a source of income as credible. Right now, I think you're going to have a hard time telling me -10s will travel 20 jumps just to run some missions in a goonswarm launchpad system. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
556
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 13:19:00 -
[32] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:To achieve what exactly? A balanced risk/reward ratio. Level 4's are silly easy ISK with zero risk once you know how to run them. Incursions at least require you to fleet up and run the risk of the logi pilots being drunk. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
212
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 13:26:00 -
[33] - Quote
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:To achieve what exactly? A balanced risk/reward ratio. Level 4's are silly easy ISK with zero risk once you know how to run them. Incursions at least require you to fleet up and run the risk of the logi pilots being drunk.
So are level 3s.
So is mining.
Given how much can be made OUT of high sec, but isn't because /effort, I don't think the problem is the risk/reward so much as the fundamental laziness of people in general. |
Silent Rambo
Legion of Seven
163
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 18:28:00 -
[34] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: PVE combat is the last thing they're going to waste their time on. There are more than a few things in line before that.
Lol, yeah totally. They should ignore one of the most visible and used features in the entire game and focus on the real issues.
Ive heard many many times from null-sec players on these forums that they have high-sec missioning alts to supplement there "terrible" null-sec income. If this is true, and you have both null players and high-sec players using NPC missions so frequently, wouldn't it be in the best interest for everyone if they fixed the gigantic bore that is mission running, or PVE combat in general? You really think someone would do that? Just log into EvE and tell lies? |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
169
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 19:46:00 -
[35] - Quote
I would definitely like to see a new classification of missions added to highsec, perhaps reclassify current L5 to L6 and add a new L5 classification designed for pilots like myself that basically has every defensive and offensive BS skill maxed thus making L4 runs too easy. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8113
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 21:08:00 -
[36] - Quote
Silent Rambo wrote: Lol, yeah totally. They should ignore one of the most visible and used features in the entire game and focus on the real issues.
Yep. Like the parts of the game that literally don't work right, like POSes.
Or the parts of the game that literally everyone uses, like ship rebalancing. Which, please note, is still far from done. Heck they haven't even started on weapon module rebalancing yet either, aside from fixing their foul up with battleship lasers. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
622
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 21:19:00 -
[37] - Quote
I have to say on missions that they need a complete revamp. I just ran through most of the Guristas epic arc and it is much more fun and challenging than the standard missions. I lost a taranis in the process but made back 4 times it's worth and had much more enjoyment in the process. I really do believe that all missions should be harder in some way either via better mission rat AI on at least some of the rats (NPC capsuleer commanders of the fleet with incursion style AI for example). Randomizing the missions would be an excellent start so the abomination that is eve-survival can be exorcised with plasma. And melta-guns (wrong game but the effect is much the same...).
Pilots need to learn to take more risk by being enticed to do so. With me it was the risk of running through null and running the missions. Not having to take large chunks of time to do so was a bonus. More risk better rewards just as it should be. More of this please...
And before those who live in null yell 'Join a corp!' I am already in one, but I often play solo and these kind of missions are great for me. I had fun, I did something different and I created content for those in and around that area who may have tried to catch me and who provided the replacement taranis and mods at 30% higher cost.
Have more incentives like these and you will draw more players like myself into lower sec regions. Even 10% of the hisec folks trying out content like this would add nearly 50% to the number of pilots in null space. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8113
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 21:26:00 -
[38] - Quote
Here's the thing about when people say "better rat AI". While I agree that PvE should be more like PvP and require fittings and tactics that are more than just the banality of today's missioning, you have to consider something.
Better AI means more server ticks. Much more. Right now, they have a pretty dumb, binary interaction. If you wanted to make them smart, they would need to use up way more server resources than they do at present.
And with the number of people doing missions, that means lag. More TiDi. Which is honestly unacceptable, and not worth it either.
The only other way to do this is to design tricky scenarios with the current rat behavior. Which is very manpower intensive, and I honestly do not think they have the time or inclination to do it. So that's out, too.
The fact of the matter is that pushing to improve the PvE experience in the game would come at the cost of other areas getting development that is not only more important, but also actually possible. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
622
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 21:32:00 -
[39] - Quote
I thought the TiDi problem was due to the number of players in a single system? Randomizing missions systems and managing the number of 'smart' AI compared to dumber than dumb AI would smooth out the issue hopefully. Considering that 80% of players run their game in hisec systems simply dismissing improvement to their area isn't an option in my book. That would be ignoring 4/5's of the player base. Not the smartest move for player retention. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8113
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 21:41:00 -
[40] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I thought the TiDi problem was due to the number of players in a single system? Randomizing missions systems and managing the number of 'smart' AI compared to dumber than dumb AI would smooth out the issue hopefully. Considering that 80% of players run their game in hisec systems simply dismissing improvement to their area isn't an option in my book. That would be ignoring 4/5's of the player base. Not the smartest move for player retention.
Think a bit further.
*Why* is it because of the number of players in a system? Because we use a lot of server ticks whenever we do anything. D scan is dozens of them at once by itself, so is the capacitor.
If you want AI to be smarter, then you would need to make them in smaller numbers, and MUCH tougher. Now, think about what that does? That slaps down new players with low skillpoints from even trying it.
And your numbers are entirely specious, by the way. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1833
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 02:20:00 -
[41] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Why? Because it is undisputedly a fact that moving them to low was a mistake and that one of the only ways to make people work harder has been taken away.
i dispute this. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Sato Page
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
134
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 05:53:00 -
[42] - Quote
As if empire LP could get more worthless. I'm ok with L5 in highSec if CCP remove LP reward for HighSec L5 Dinsdale Pirannha for CEO of CCP |
MagicToes
Dr Pepper Sales Team
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 08:17:00 -
[43] - Quote
No thanks. As if having FW murder the value of the LP's wasn't bad enough on the main income source for non FW-lowsecers. Last thing we need is a huge numbers of bears devaluing it further by flooding the market. Access to the L5's is also a decent conflict driver, low sec corps compete for control of the decent mission systems. You've really given no thought to the effect your changes would have on lowsec.
You've not provided a single good reason as to why high sec should get another decent isk source either. It's a risk-reward kind of game and there is already excessive isk making opportunities in the safety of high sec.
...and by the way saying the 4 hour cooldown will stop people just doing missions they get in 0.5's....it won't. They'll use the same tactic which I'm not going to say that people currently use in low for avoiding non blitzable missions. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
622
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 08:23:00 -
[44] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I thought the TiDi problem was due to the number of players in a single system? Randomizing missions systems and managing the number of 'smart' AI compared to dumber than dumb AI would smooth out the issue hopefully. Considering that 80% of players run their game in hisec systems simply dismissing improvement to their area isn't an option in my book. That would be ignoring 4/5's of the player base. Not the smartest move for player retention. Think a bit further. *Why* is it because of the number of players in a system? Because we use a lot of server ticks whenever we do anything. D scan is dozens of them at once by itself, so is the capacitor.
So spread the missions across random systems to lessen the load by using the least used systems for these type of missions.
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: If you want AI to be smarter, then you would need to make them in smaller numbers, and MUCH tougher. Now, think about what that does? That slaps down new players with low skillpoints from even trying it.
I'm not advocating that all missions should be this way (though they should all be randomized in my opinion). Rather that every now and then one of the tough AI should pop up much like the shadow serpentis etc etc. If you don't want newer player to encounter them then have them only turn up in level III missions upwards though I would question why new players shouldn't encounter more PvP like rats earlier. Just scale that rat ship capabilities accordingly to provide a challenge that is surmountable with lower skills.
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: And your numbers are entirely specious, by the way.
My numbers are based on the often quoted '40% stay to level their raven'. So if 50% leave after 1 month and 40% level their raven (implying to me that they are running missions whilst training up to fly raven in level IV's' that leaves 10% engaging in other activities. That gives an 80/20 split between mission runners and those who do other things. Even if that assumption is skewed there are a large number of players who play the game to run the missions and enjoy doing so. I disagree with the idea that they should somehow be coerced into moving to lo/null. The rewards are already far greater for missioning/ratting in null yet these players choose not to do so.
They are still paying to play the game one way or another and as long as they accept that in doing so they are positioning themselves as targets and a blingy ship will be ganked at some point then that's fine by me. Being a sandbox means players do what they like and others can interfere how they choose. Because they choose to run in hisec doesn't mean that there playstyle should be completely ignored and any changes to improve hisec missioning would naturally benefit losec and null just the same.
Unless of course the nullbear ratters would panic at the thought of non-predictable sites |
Sara Tosa
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
44
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 10:01:00 -
[45] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Here's the thing about when people say "better rat AI". While I agree that PvE should be more like PvP and require fittings and tactics that are more than just the banality of today's missioning, you have to consider something.
no game ever has been able to make pve equipment worth in pvp and vice-versa (other than the ones were's an "I win" unbalanced equipment and devels do nothing to fix it), no game ever will be able to untill we will have truly sentient machines so it wont be pve anymore. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
337
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 11:14:00 -
[46] - Quote
MagicToes wrote:No thanks. As if having FW murder the value of the LP's wasn't bad enough on the main income source for non FW-lowsecers. Last thing we need is a huge numbers of bears devaluing it further by flooding the market. Access to the L5's is also a decent conflict driver, low sec corps compete for control of the decent mission systems. You've really given no thought to the effect your changes would have on lowsec.
You've not provided a single good reason as to why high sec should get another decent isk source either. It's a risk-reward kind of game and there is already excessive isk making opportunities in the safety of high sec.
...and by the way saying the 4 hour cooldown will stop people just doing missions they get in 0.5's....it won't. They'll use the same tactic which I'm not going to say that people currently use in low for avoiding non blitzable missions.
You seem to be confusing steady income with crazy profit margin. I thought about lowsec, I live in lowsec 90% of the time. I don't mission in lowsec because it's stupid. I run exploration sites in lowsec because I can make like easy 300 mil a day and not sweat to death that I'm going to get ganked. Last 2 days I have been running level 4's and made a comfortable 250 million in those two days from *smart choices* about what I do and how I do it, supplemented by salvage and loot. I am however a pilot with 55 million sp in combat skills and my proficiency at running missions is probably as good as I care to make it.
I don't even flood the market, I sell my produce smart. Stocking remote hubs with reasonably priced ammo is a surprisingly effective way to make some coin. Large and medium armour reppers to combat hubs. Large shield reppers to POS farms near null. In my own experience as a new player I consumed most of the ammo I made while waiting for better things to train so I doubt that your assertion is as genuine as you suggest.
and the 4 hour cooldown can be bypassed? Interesting. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
MagicToes
Dr Pepper Sales Team
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 12:00:00 -
[47] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote: In my own experience as a new player I consumed most of the ammo I made while waiting for better things to train so I doubt that your assertion is as genuine as you suggest.
Which assertion is that?
I'm not really sure what the point of the rest of your post is... It just sounds like your unhappy because you can't run them safely. If that's the case it's just the risk-reward aspect of the game working as intended. Complaining that you can't do stuff because your unwilling to risk losses is ridiculous.
Just because claim you wouldn't flood the market is pretty irrelevant, what's important is what would happen on the macro scale. If highseccers could run them, it would increase the supply of LP which in turn would devalue it. Just like it does when one of the FW sides start doing well.
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
338
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 12:29:00 -
[48] - Quote
The relative value of LP was never what was important. That's a profiteering "I play only to make money" kind of mindset. FW was about giving low SP players an avenue to make money while enjoying some pvp. Unfortunately as we saw with cloaked WCS bots it was just straight up too easy.
Me not running level 4's in low is because I'm smart enough not to whelp a ship in low that could be doing the same activity in high with less risk. That's just business. You'd have to be pants on head stupid to put yourself in danger like that for level 4s in low. It's exactly the same question as running anoms in enemy nullsec. Why would you? Literally what could compel you to do that? The joy of ratting in someone elses space?
There's an assload of claims here that people in low run level 5's yet I haven't seen an actual post from someone who actually does. I know someone who does and they use a very specific fit for the job. Taking like values here: should I consider the lack of posts from these super profitable L5 runners to be evidence of my truth just as you make unsubstantiated claims that it does happen without anyone backing you up?
I said before that the majority of the reward should be in LP. To burn ISK. Since L5's tank standings they can be modified to produce tags for navy gear which might even solve the bottleneck I identified nearly a year ago in this thread here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346.
And then when that is done CCP can introduce Kill Missions that are very hard 1v1 or 1v2 scenarios for players to fight against NPCs that have player like levels of tank and damage for reward.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
MagicToes
Dr Pepper Sales Team
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 12:52:00 -
[49] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote: There's an assload of claims here that people in low run level 5's yet I haven't seen an actual post from someone who actually does. I know someone who does and they use a very specific fit for the job. Taking like values here: should I consider the lack of posts from these super profitable L5 runners to be evidence of my truth just as you make unsubstantiated claims that it does happen without anyone backing you up?
Haha that's priceless.... my "unsubstantiated claims" are based on personal experience as a regular L5 runner.
Yet your evidence of being right is because your friend told you so? Absolutely priceless!
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
338
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 13:07:00 -
[50] - Quote
So you admit to having a vested interest in keeping them isolated and restricted? Could you discredit your argument any further?
I have never heard of people fighting over level 5 systems. Gonna need some citation there. You also totally ignored addressing this part here Quote:The relative value of LP was never what was important. That's a profiteering "I play only to make money" kind of mindset. FW was about giving low SP players an avenue to make money while enjoying some pvp. Unfortunately as we saw with cloaked WCS bots it was just straight up too easy.
Me not running level 4's in low is because I'm smart enough not to whelp a ship in low that could be doing the same activity in high with less risk. That's just business. You'd have to be pants on head stupid to put yourself in danger like that for level 4s in low. It's exactly the same question as running anoms in enemy nullsec. Why would you? Literally what could compel you to do that? The joy of ratting in someone elses space?
You have something to say about that or not?
MagicToes wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote: In my own experience as a new player I consumed most of the ammo I made while waiting for better things to train so I doubt that your assertion is as genuine as you suggest.
Which assertion is that?
The assertion that more people eating LP will harm you in any meaningful way. You just don't want more competition. Newsflash, the EVE economy has matured to such a point where even big events like B-R5RB are just drops in the ocean in terms of market effects. The dev blog confirmed as much, within like 48hrs all mineral value was restored. The economy really wouldn't feel anything from some people doing L5s in high especially if they got redirected to low for most of them. As for your technique to avoid missions that sounds like an exploit. Or just a clever use of alts. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
|
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 13:10:00 -
[51] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: And there is already fleet PvE in highsec in the form of Incursions (Which are not the Isk faucet people like to claim because of limited availability, contests & all the downtime that people never count)
Even with downtime/contest/limited availabilty there is alot of isk comming into the economy from incursions. A pilot can make 2b isk each day* (raw isk payout, not ounting LP as that takes isk out of the economy) runing HQ sites, Those sites are run with 40 people in fleet so thats easily 80b/day for 1 fleet. Add a 2nd fleet and its 160b/day and there still wouldnt be much need for contest. Would not be supprised if VG/assault fleets could match this income, but unsure how active the communities for those sites are
*calculated with 3 sites/hr and 23hr/day, most pilots will be changed but its irrelevant WHO makes the isk as long as its made. |
MagicToes
Dr Pepper Sales Team
3
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 14:26:00 -
[52] - Quote
Welp forum just chewed a long repsonse, and I'm too lazy to rewite it, especially seeing this idea is obviously a non starter.
Short lazy responses...
1. Citation see Hysera or the one next door to ostingele that Ninja Unicorns used to use a lot.
2. No, pretty meaningless paragraph, LP value is obviously important. The only thing I agree with is that L4's in low sec should be better rewarded. If the potential gains of taking someone elses activity were worth the risk, I would do it. You just don't want to have to compete for resources or take any risks, so you dont deserve the good rewards.
3. Yes, I have api pulled databases showing the value of lp at any given time. This falls significantly when the faction my agent is associated with is doing well.
What you're asking for is the same as wanting moon goo from high sec posses. A piece of the pie without earning it. |
Sara Tosa
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
45
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 16:11:00 -
[53] - Quote
MagicToes wrote:
What you're asking for is the same as wanting moon goo from high sec posses. A piece of the pie without earning it.
actually what he asked was to have mission givers in high but missions in low, which for low denizens could be pretty intresting...
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
3180
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 16:18:00 -
[54] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Why? Because it is undisputedly a fact that moving them to low was a mistake and that one of the only ways to make people work harder has been taken away. i dispute this. i also dispute this. they were never meant to be in high in the first place. "Confirming EVE is hot, batshit crazy, and puts out." -Omar Alharazaad "CAKE CANNOT HOLD UP TO BEING A CHARACTER DAMNIT." --áUnsuccessful At Everything |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
230
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 18:32:00 -
[55] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:People run level 5s? I know one guy that used to. I personally just use wormholes to move around and run exploration sites for a dizzying several hundred mil a day. I too can empty cite meaningless scenarios. Naturally is it better to run level 5s or level 4s in low seeing as you say level 5s are valuable and must therefore be hotly contested. Or are they incidentally run by pairs of multi boxed residents in their tz offpeak?
I said that missions should only spawnnin 0.5 or lower to represent some extra danger to the mission runner. They can choose to run it in 0.5 at the risk of being ganked and rather easily. I'll have to disagree with you on this one, old chum. As you know, I can solo them pretty easily in a tengu, but more than that quite a few people can solo blitz them in ravens. The reason why the tengu is more attractive is because it's a more secure and mobile platform, and it's easier to get out there. Generally lvl 5s in low work well because they're limited to being corp activities with payouts actually worth their time.
See...I think instead of adding lvl 5s to high, they should actually just make higher-level missions like they do with DED sites. Level 6 and possibly even 7 missions would be interesting, and I think it would be an absolutely amazing venue for fleet warfare. I WANT to see lvl 5 and 6 pirate faction missions; I want to see alliances gathering dozens of people together for a massive cap PVE op where they have to fight NPC titans and dreads, and get stupidly high rewards.
I want to see people get returns from mission running to reflect how much effort they put into it. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8147
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 21:31:00 -
[56] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:So you admit to having a vested interest in keeping them isolated and restricted? Could you discredit your argument any further?
No one here really needs an argument anymore, the thread ended when I linked that dev post. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
486
|
Posted - 2014.07.25 07:02:00 -
[57] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote: One could claim ganking is too. Are you saying increased ease of ganking mission runners is bad?
Implying ganking is an actual problem.
I've been living in highsec space for 3+ years and I only got ganked once. That was because I was alt tabbed out in an ogb T3 in a 0.5 with 10 flashy reds in system. I was in a safe but they probed me down.
I deserved it.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
322
|
Posted - 2014.07.25 07:10:00 -
[58] - Quote
Not really expecting a straight answer for this question, but what the hell. Have we not seen this stupid request enough (again, considering this is the Eve forums, I'm not sure if I should expect a straight answer)?
No. End of the f'ing argument. L1-4 is enough for High-Sec. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1443
|
Posted - 2014.07.25 15:13:00 -
[59] - Quote
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote: And there is already fleet PvE in highsec in the form of Incursions (Which are not the Isk faucet people like to claim because of limited availability, contests & all the downtime that people never count)
Even with downtime/contest/limited availabilty there is alot of isk comming into the economy from incursions. A pilot can make 2b isk each day* (raw isk payout, not ounting LP as that takes isk out of the economy) runing HQ sites, Those sites are run with 40 people in fleet so thats easily 80b/day for 1 fleet. Add a 2nd fleet and its 160b/day and there still wouldnt be much need for contest. Would not be supprised if VG/assault fleets could match this income, but unsure how active the communities for those sites are *calculated with 3 sites/hr and 23hr/day, most pilots will be changed but its irrelevant WHO makes the isk as long as its made. 5 Trillion a month is about the average that Incursions make (Data estimated off CCP Fanfest graphs, if you want to argue it, get the graphs, link them along with your exact averaging maths from said graphs). Average that out assuming 100 per hour per pilot and see how many pilots Incursions actually support at that theoretical rate. Then since the ratio is available you can also look at the LP rate and work out how much more income that adds to incursions. (Answer, not a heck of a lot as the main payout is actually isk) By my quick maths a grand total of ..... 70 pilots are supported at the payout rate you are talking. Given the Incursion communities are at least 500 strong, that tells you how fake the claimed top rates actually are. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
938
|
Posted - 2014.07.25 17:18:00 -
[60] - Quote
L4s should be moved to lowsec. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |