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) |
DJ N00B
National Order Of Bastards Yearning
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 17:49:00 -
[31] - Quote
yes, reverse the payout nerf
ota's - even if you bring the hacking can closer, it doesn't make that much of a difference. (yes we've tried it) - The mara is the biggest issue. either take it off the kill list or have it move in with the rest of the fleet. It's too hard to kill for pug fleets causing the site to take way too long for them. It also forces fleets to have to field snipers which then put you at a disadvantage in the other sites.
doing these two things will make the sites viable again for pug fleets.
|
Elsa Nietchize
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 17:50:00 -
[32] - Quote
The problem with all PVE content is that eventually becomes boring and repetitive. Incursions are like raids where at least you have the social aspect to keep it fun. If it's too mind numbing, then you get bored and quit. If it's too much effort for the reward, it becomes tedious and you quit. The previous version of Incursions was not immune from this. They just paid out so much, most people who ran them didn't care.
Incursions are just a means to an end, we run them to make isk so we can enjoy the game. Like a job. Once the fun or isk faction drops below a threshold we look at alternative means of income.
I think the social aspect is very important. This is an MMO and while this game is very conducive to the solo player, the real content for groups (especially around PVE) is severely lacking. Social interaction is the real basis of MMOs and while solo activities are fun, interaction is what keeps us logging on.
Unfortunately, because these factors are not measurable and to further complicate things, they're different for each player, this means there is no right answer. I propose you do remove the 10% payout cut. Then watch. See how the community reacts. Gather metrics on Incursion usage and see if the people running them is an acceptable population for the event. If you feel it's still too low, go further, if it's too high, cut it back a bit. CCP should work with the CSM to define a player threshold they think is acceptable for this PVE content.
I did run Incursions but the isk was a huge part of it. I feel bad for my corp mates because they can't fly pimped BSs. I'd like to see the lower end Incursions receive a buff so that while it's not as lucrative as VGs, they still get to experience cooperative game play in a manner that pays out more than they can do solo.
I think this last part is key. Current PVE content doesn't seem to scale. So many players (myself included) feel we can actually be more effective solo than we can in a group. I don't think there's anything wrong with being able to be effective on your own, but in an MMO setting it's important that whole is greater than the sum of the parts. |
Korgan Nailo
5ER3NITY INC Supernova Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 17:58:00 -
[33] - Quote
In shor words as walls of text nobody reads anyway: - VGs are fine, even with the 10% reduction, the income is what it should be IMHO - Assaults are too difficult for the volley and the amount of tank you need. Basically you're going with the same tank as HQ / Mom sites now. - HQs offer too little of a reward. If the site is more difficult, requires more people and takes longer to do, should offer higher rewards.
A GREAT plus would be to get rid of those Acceleration Gates at 65kms in some sites. Totally unecessary IMHO, just serves to create a mess after the first pocket. |
Jadzeer DAXX
Carbide Wine and Beer Industries
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 18:01:00 -
[34] - Quote
You have nerfed the fun out of incursions and now made them a chore and a pita - gj... |
Inflatable Girlfriend
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 18:21:00 -
[35] - Quote
isk per hour was not the only reason most ran vanguards it was for the fact that u could very easaly keep a 10-11 man fleet together for long times many times they would start after downtime and go till downtime (of the fleet would be passed off to other FC's) and u could maintain a waitlist for vanguard fleet.
assualts or hq are much longer to form up a fleet for then after a few sites people are like **** this and find an excuse to escape and go back to vanguards or thats how it was before the nerf i think like myself many have just gave up on incursions for now.
reverse the 10% pay as site average time alone was a huge nerf as it was sites that took 1.5-3 minutes now take 10 minutse more with weaker fleets.
increase pay/lp on assualts and hq give people incentives to stay in those fleets when they finaly do form up.
another reason people so enjoy vanguards was the contesting sure some hated that but many of us actualy enjoyed droping in behind other fleets and denying them the isk.
i agree the old income from vans was a bit high but now lvl 3 missions in a drake is about the same isk/hour as vanguards lol i can make more on lvl 4's and even exploration with its chance to give nothing :)
adding objectives would be intresting just not so complex as they would incease site time any more then they already are now. but simple things like the ota hacking wich an out of fleet alt in a cheap frig can do for the fleet.
as for all the whiners go back to ur over powered moon mining and sactums with botting carriers we know u use. |
Andrew Dahan
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 18:22:00 -
[36] - Quote
armor incursion is absolutely deserted; you can barely get in a fleet because there isn't any, nobody is doing OTAs anymore, the payout is pretty much miserable not necesarily because of the nerf, but especially because the influence bar fills much much more slowly now (people left and thus there are now fleets running or very few). It's rather sad it turned out this way, wouldn't want incursions become another worhtless EVE feature that nobody is using |
Just Alter
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
90
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 18:57:00 -
[37] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote: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.
Well i'm impressed a dev actually responded to a post, usually after creating the thread they vanish; except for sreegs maybe.
As for the degenerated thread: as a whole it may be shitfest but reading through it still is useful if someone is looking for good and unalterated feedback. I hope creating a new thread doesnt mean that all those posts and the time people spent writing them are wasted.
Quote: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. That is a lie. A deliberate lie, no more than that.
If you actually bothered to read the thread you'd see the problem is not(only) about isk but about the fact that incursions are even more of a pain in the ass now, amongst other things.
|
t8xxic Thiesant
Tactical Marm1te Soldiers
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:02:00 -
[38] - Quote
the rebalancing of incs has been very interesting and entertaining but you overdid on the otas ill write what i think needs to be changed vgs reput 10% pay
OTA: remove the mara keep the tower or the other way around OR make the mara spawn closer NCO: nothing NMC: make the mara spawn 10km closer even 5k km will do
NCN: great job they dont take forever anymore NCS: make only 1 remote repper spawn at a time, instead of having otuni or 2 intaki make it both 1 intaki and 1 otuni same for maras OCF: remove one auga form each spawn
hqs buff 8% payout
|
Asmodes Reynolds
Rayn Enterprises
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:10:00 -
[39] - Quote
Soundwave, before this thread gets out of control, I have questions for you;
What does CCP intend incursions to be?
Do you want them to draw conflict between null-sec and low-sec entities or low sec and high sec entities or both?
If your intention was to draw Null-sec entities into low sec, then you did the opposite
The CFC as a whole has abandoned them, and to my knowledge we were the only 0.0 entities bothered to run them in the first place. Pre-patch we could easily make 80-100 mill/hour running them one after another. We Only run Vanguards, Because of the logistics of moving ships and keeping the required number of people in Fleet over the long term. Post-patch the most you can make is about is about 80 mil/hour I think it averages out to be about 60 may be 65mil an hour . Which the average null sec dweller can easily make that by running anomalies in there home space. So why bother with the logistics to move ships and organize a fleet sometimes 40 jumps from home?
If your intentions were to to create conflict between high-sec entities and Losec entities.
Then you will need to widen the Profit margin between high sec incursions and Losec incursions while keeping it below what someone can make doing anomalies in sovereignty space. You need to make it enough to justify the logistics issues and the danger increase. Or my personal favorite just remove them from high sec entirely. (If Concord with a 200 man fleet of goon/test tornados In under One minute Then such invaders should be no problem lol)
do you intend them to be just an alternate activity to the existing PVE mechanics or do you wish them to pay out more?
Where do you intend that the bulk of the incentives to run these to come from?
I look forward to your responses, and I hope my comments are helpful. |
Katalci
Creative Cookie Procuring Veto Corp
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:13:00 -
[40] - Quote
Reverse the "difficulty" changes and reduce the 0.0/low to highsec ratio from 0.6 to 0.3.
Asmodes Reynolds wrote:Or my personal favorite just remove them from high sec entirely. This is stupid and unncessary. Some strange people think that they're fun, and those people live in highsec. All that needs to be done is a very large reduction in their profitability in highsec. The fun won't change, only the money.
(I say the same for level 4s -- remove them from highsec and make new, better level 3s) |
|
Audrey Koshka
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:23:00 -
[41] - Quote
I've been leading fleets recently of EVE University students who are often newer to Incursions, so these are my thoughts from that perspective.
- Shiny fleets don't hack in OTAs, but when your fleet is half drakes, hacking makes a notable difference. Moving the towers closer such that the hacker can keep within rep range of logistics is something to consider. This could help kitchen sink fleets without pushing the top tier fleet profitability beyond your targets. Hacking also introduces a useful role for a really new player who otherwise wouldn't be able to participate in Incursions yet.
- I'm mixed regarding removing the Mara or making it an optional kill. Amusingly enough, in a kitchen sink fleet it gives the Drake something helpful to do. Maybe moving the Mara orbit range in a tiny bit so missile supports at III can reach it consistently. A kitchen sink fleet has an extremely difficult time applying enough dps to the Mara to punch through the OTA rep tower, but in conjunction with a hacker we've been able to take the Mara down before the next wave with only a couple longer range ships. I kinda like that dynamic actually, so I think I'd be in favor of keeping the Mara but making hacking a little easier.
- Backing out the 10% pay reduction sounds like a good idea if you feel that doesn't move the upper pay bounds beyond your targets. Honestly I don't find the 10% paycut a big deal, but I think the psychological effect of the 'double nerf' as some folks have put it was noticable.
While it's unfortunate to see the drop in participation, I think it was a necessary byproduct of balancing incursions. The EVE University missions channel was practically dead for months because Incursions paid so much more in comparison. I now see people in both channels choosing which content is better aligned with their interests. |
Alice Krysta
Symbol Of Chaos
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:24:00 -
[42] - Quote
t8xxic Thiesant wrote:the rebalancing of incs has been very interesting and entertaining but you overdid on the otas ill write what i think needs to be changed vgs reput 10% pay
OTA: remove the mara keep the tower or the other way around OR make the mara spawn closer NCO: nothing NMC: make the mara spawn 10km closer even 5k km will do
NCN: great job they dont take forever anymore NCS: make only 1 remote repper spawn at a time, instead of having otuni or 2 intaki make it both 1 intaki and 1 otuni same for maras OCF: remove one auga form each spawn
hqs buff 8% payout
i totally agree with this, my recomandations: (payouts needs a little buff now since the incursions are taking to long)
Vanguards needs the 10% iskies back, (10,5 mil isk / player), 8-10 minutes per site Assaults 20 mil isk /player instead of 18,5 in first stage (cruciable), then after nerf (inferno) 18,2 mil isk , 15-20 minutes per site Hq-s 35,5 mil isk / player instead or 31,5 atm, 30-35 min per site thats more balanced way of incursions payouts so the player will run all of them with same isk payouts (isk/ hour ratio) but more / less dificulty.
Loyalty points are fine, no need buffs or nerfs, might make them posible to exchange for pirate NPC-s with an multiplier of 2 Concord LP per Pirate LP, but this might get posible if u think for a future combined factions incursions (maybe a new patch), angels coming to help sansha, or fighting along with guristas to destroy the sansha fleet ... might also be fun for incursions
Anyways i totaly hate NCN-s cuz i dont see their porpouse in splitting the fleet, as incursions somehow prepare and educate a proper way to fly with a fleet in PVP & PVE, in no circumstances the fleet is suposed to split, i dont like the ideea.
|
nomatech
Terbo Holdings Allies with None
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:28:00 -
[43] - Quote
Hi Soundwave.
Thank you for your willingness to continue to review incursions. I'm speaking from an almost exclusively HQ fleet FC point of view and only occasionaly an AS FC point of view...my knowledge of the VG folks is mostly anecdotal.
One of the things coloring the feedback from the changes made last week is the fact that either due to fewer VG fleets running or changes to the Sansha Influence mechanic (or both), the Sansha Influence has been an order of magnitude harder to move since the patch. While we have the ability to compensate for running at high levels of influence in the HQ fleets and to a lesser extent in the AS fleets for longer periods of time, the VG's have been hit harder by this than anticipated I think. With fewer fleets running (Incursion local on the Shields side has been running at 50-75% of the pre-patch levels if that) it takes longer to run the sites, and with the bar being perceived to be not moving as fast as before, I think there may be some pilot frustration causing attrition. It's one thing to nerf the income, and make the sites perhaps more difficult...but stacking the higher influence for hours and hours longer than before is like a 3x affect rather than a 1-2x that you may have been aiming for.
As to the AS sites specifically, the Assaults appear to be only slightly more attractive to pilots and FC's since the patch. The changes to date do not at this early stage appear to have been sufficient to attract and sustain a new core or community of dedicated AS pilots and FC's in the long term. So I do applaud your interest in reviewing them in terms of making them more attractive to pilots either through further site refinements or even perhaps still meddling in the rewards. Again, at higher levels of Sansha influence, the longer run times of the AS sites make them even less attractive. We (The Valhalla Project HQ and AS Shield community) have been able to run AS fleets to date mainly as overflow from a full HQ fleet, and again only as a stepping stone into building a second HQ fleet. One of our long-term AS FC's returned from break and ran for a couple of days but didn't seem overly excited, and appears now to have returned to break. So HQ's remain far more attractive to all but a very small sub-set of pilots and FC's, again, not large enough to sustain a dedicated community.
I do not think this was an intended consequence of your changes.
You didn't ask specifically about the HQ changes. But I'm going to give feedback anyway. Only one site (NRF) was changed at all. It takes a bit longer to run and is no longer blitzable...no biggie. The sites take 50% or so longer to run at high influence, ok, we can work with that. And we have to now pay a little more attention to feet composition both due to the NRF changes and Influence levels (horrors...paying attention is so wrong). So, we've actually seen a small amount of growth in the Shields HQ community due probably to our stability and proven ability to cope with the patch changes. This growth however comes probably largely at the cost of both the VG fleets and potentially at cost of the Armor AS/HQ community who may not be able to afford those losses long-term.
So, TLDR. I think the Influence could afford to be looked at. At least in the context of it being a greater nerf than perhaps intended in the greater Incursion context. I also think AS's need to be again looked at to see if there are ways to increase the attractiveness to both pilots and FC's...however I don't know if that will take reward changes or site changes.
nomatech. |
adopt
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
393
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:55:00 -
[44] - Quote
nomatech wrote:Hi Soundwave.
Thank you for your willingness to continue to review incursions. I'm speaking from an almost exclusively HQ fleet FC point of view and only occasionaly an AS FC point of view...my knowledge of the VG folks is mostly anecdotal.
One of the things coloring the feedback from the changes made last week is the fact that either due to fewer VG fleets running or changes to the Sansha Influence mechanic (or both), the Sansha Influence has been an order of magnitude harder to move since the patch. While we have the ability to compensate for running at high levels of influence in the HQ fleets and to a lesser extent in the AS fleets for longer periods of time, the VG's have been hit harder by this than anticipated I think. With fewer fleets running (Incursion local on the Shields side has been running at 50-75% of the pre-patch levels if that) it takes longer to run the sites, and with the bar being perceived to be not moving as fast as before, I think there may be some pilot frustration causing attrition. It's one thing to nerf the income, and make the sites perhaps more difficult...but stacking the higher influence for hours and hours longer than before is like a 3x affect rather than a 1-2x that you may have been aiming for.
As to the AS sites specifically, the Assaults appear to be only slightly more attractive to pilots and FC's since the patch. The changes to date do not at this early stage appear to have been sufficient to attract and sustain a new core or community of dedicated AS pilots and FC's in the long term. So I do applaud your interest in reviewing them in terms of making them more attractive to pilots either through further site refinements or even perhaps still meddling in the rewards. Again, at higher levels of Sansha influence, the longer run times of the AS sites make them even less attractive. We (The Valhalla Project HQ and AS Shield community) have been able to run AS fleets to date mainly as overflow from a full HQ fleet, and again only as a stepping stone into building a second HQ fleet. One of our long-term AS FC's returned from break and ran for a couple of days but didn't seem overly excited, and appears now to have returned to break. So HQ's remain far more attractive to all but a very small sub-set of pilots and FC's, again, not large enough to sustain a dedicated community.
I do not think this was an intended consequence of your changes.
You didn't ask specifically about the HQ changes. But I'm going to give feedback anyway. Only one site (NRF) was changed at all. It takes a bit longer to run and is no longer blitzable...no biggie. The sites take 50% or so longer to run at high influence, ok, we can work with that. And we have to now pay a little more attention to feet composition both due to the NRF changes and Influence levels (horrors...paying attention is so wrong). So, we've actually seen a small amount of growth in the Shields HQ community due probably to our stability and proven ability to cope with the patch changes. This growth however comes probably largely at the cost of both the VG fleets and potentially at cost of the Armor AS/HQ community who may not be able to afford those losses long-term.
So, TLDR. I think the Influence could afford to be looked at. At least in the context of it being a greater nerf than perhaps intended in the greater Incursion context. I also think AS's need to be again looked at to see if there are ways to increase the attractiveness to both pilots and FC's...however I don't know if that will take reward changes or site changes.
nomatech.
This is quite literally the only post in this entire thread I read through entirely.
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 |
D3V1L Soulless
Devil's Entrusted Associates
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 19:56:00 -
[45] - Quote
adopt wrote:nomatech wrote:Hi Soundwave.
Thank you for your willingness to continue to review incursions. I'm speaking from an almost exclusively HQ fleet FC point of view and only occasionaly an AS FC point of view...my knowledge of the VG folks is mostly anecdotal.
One of the things coloring the feedback from the changes made last week is the fact that either due to fewer VG fleets running or changes to the Sansha Influence mechanic (or both), the Sansha Influence has been an order of magnitude harder to move since the patch. While we have the ability to compensate for running at high levels of influence in the HQ fleets and to a lesser extent in the AS fleets for longer periods of time, the VG's have been hit harder by this than anticipated I think. With fewer fleets running (Incursion local on the Shields side has been running at 50-75% of the pre-patch levels if that) it takes longer to run the sites, and with the bar being perceived to be not moving as fast as before, I think there may be some pilot frustration causing attrition. It's one thing to nerf the income, and make the sites perhaps more difficult...but stacking the higher influence for hours and hours longer than before is like a 3x affect rather than a 1-2x that you may have been aiming for.
As to the AS sites specifically, the Assaults appear to be only slightly more attractive to pilots and FC's since the patch. The changes to date do not at this early stage appear to have been sufficient to attract and sustain a new core or community of dedicated AS pilots and FC's in the long term. So I do applaud your interest in reviewing them in terms of making them more attractive to pilots either through further site refinements or even perhaps still meddling in the rewards. Again, at higher levels of Sansha influence, the longer run times of the AS sites make them even less attractive. We (The Valhalla Project HQ and AS Shield community) have been able to run AS fleets to date mainly as overflow from a full HQ fleet, and again only as a stepping stone into building a second HQ fleet. One of our long-term AS FC's returned from break and ran for a couple of days but didn't seem overly excited, and appears now to have returned to break. So HQ's remain far more attractive to all but a very small sub-set of pilots and FC's, again, not large enough to sustain a dedicated community.
I do not think this was an intended consequence of your changes.
You didn't ask specifically about the HQ changes. But I'm going to give feedback anyway. Only one site (NRF) was changed at all. It takes a bit longer to run and is no longer blitzable...no biggie. The sites take 50% or so longer to run at high influence, ok, we can work with that. And we have to now pay a little more attention to feet composition both due to the NRF changes and Influence levels (horrors...paying attention is so wrong). So, we've actually seen a small amount of growth in the Shields HQ community due probably to our stability and proven ability to cope with the patch changes. This growth however comes probably largely at the cost of both the VG fleets and potentially at cost of the Armor AS/HQ community who may not be able to afford those losses long-term.
So, TLDR. I think the Influence could afford to be looked at. At least in the context of it being a greater nerf than perhaps intended in the greater Incursion context. I also think AS's need to be again looked at to see if there are ways to increase the attractiveness to both pilots and FC's...however I don't know if that will take reward changes or site changes.
nomatech. This is quite literally the only post in this entire thread I read through entirely.
i second that, this is more or less my point of view too no need to say any more. only thing is with these new harder vg sites pilots have begun abandoning incursions, they are not attractive. is your point realy to nerf things so much people wont do them? i would think u want people to enjoy your game. and people was sitting for hours on end with vanguards. contesting almost every site. nowadays i have been contested once since the patch, and that was just bad luck, 5 open sites in system and 2 vg fleets. rethink your strategies ccp. u want people to like the game? then dont kill the parts that people like. thats just unlogical. supply and demand is the key here. i could go on explaining why but i think nova here did some of the work for me. |
Sheol Duncan
B0rthole Test Alliance Please Ignore
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 20:21:00 -
[46] - Quote
I'd just like to make the simple comment that group PvE should be rewarded at a higher rate than solo PvP. It's more work, but it's also more fun; it should be incentivized. |
D3V1L Soulless
Devil's Entrusted Associates
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 20:24:00 -
[47] - Quote
true, building communitys are what the game is about. and incursions are a meeting point for all players where alliance and corp politics are left at the door. this should be harvested by ccp. this is what will make players come back day after and jack in to new eden.
after all people ae making farming more difficult by taking the mom out only days after the incursions is established. |
Aileren
Aliastra Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 20:40:00 -
[48] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote: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.
NCN's are the big problems in Assaults. I get the whole spawn random waves thing, but you need to be mindful of what you're spawning, and how the ships interact. For instance, a randomly spawned room on the BS side that is all reppers, or boosters and reppers. It's not difficult, it's just boring. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
179
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 20:40:00 -
[49] - Quote
Herr Ronin wrote:
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. )
Herr Ronin
ISN Management Of ISN - Incursion Shiny Network.
Again I totally agree with what is said here. -The NCS's were nerfed so they take longer to complete. I'm still scratching my head how in the world you could have thought doing what you did with them made them any shorter? -The OCF's actually have more ships in them ( many augas which were not thier before patch ) I'm still scratching my head how in the world you could have thought doing what you did with them made them any shorter or more attractive? - The NCNs were watered down in number of ships inside. I honestly don't think this watering down made them significanly shorter and they still take the longest to complete and the form up for them has not shortened at all Even though now T1 Battle cruisers can now go through both sides.
To reiteriate : " 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 " ?
Unintentional bug Working as IntendedGäó...-á-á http://i.imgur.com/aYOL1.jpg
|
UTHAJA
Republic Logistics
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 20:45:00 -
[50] - Quote
There are a much more aspects, I will comment only on a few. I fly armor and I support incursion fleets nearly every day.
Impressions
1. Many pilots have left the place. From one day to another about 50% of the pilots were missing. There have been severe losses on the first days after the change.
2. Plain legion fleets are gone, which I do assume to be positive. The composition of fleets is valuable now.
3. OTAs are a hell to do. The over-nerf hits in all aspects at the same time. The effects of the many little things are : reps don't work at full, the auga is close to be unbeatable and jams lead to ECCM use which deliminates the use of tracking comps/links. Armor fleets are especially beaten, because they are missing the support of firepower in the lows anyway. Pilots have moved from armor to shields. Standard T2 hardeners do by no means match the damage-take-in by sansha firepower. Example : if U get down like ice in the sun in a properly fitted mach - having my skillpoints - the fun is over. And another fallout : a regular player cant afford the additional a-type **** to fit for a level x-tank.
Assaults and bigger : Supporting as a simple pilot like me is still fun with good FCs
What CCP should do : ask experienced FCs from shield and armor what to change. My proposal regarding armor : listen for instance to poor bastard and t8xxic Thiesant
havy a nice day |
|
Asmodes Reynolds
Rayn Enterprises
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 21:03:00 -
[51] - Quote
PVE Fleet Commanders really !!! the troll is a really strong with this thread. ..... ........ ..... Wait you're serious that's funnier. |
Oucha Chohoyhoy
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 21:08:00 -
[52] - Quote
Incursions made me lose complete interest in EVE
I blitzed them for about a month in January I believe our fastest tics were 10m every 2 minutes. But when it got slower it was still lightning fast. In my little group, which had about 50 people coming and going with a few regulars some would stay on for 16+ hours at a time. I made so much ISK that what was the point in doing anything else? The thing is skill-wise the entry level was on par with mining. Yet the rewards were night and day. Obviously you spoiled people with the free ISK and know they're crying but there's no reason why Incursions should be what they were, they don't even make any sense (in high-sec)
Please don't bring that game breaking payout system back.
If you do buff the payout only do it in low-sec and 0.0 please.
PLEASE |
Trinity Six
Hedion University Amarr Empire
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 21:33:00 -
[53] - Quote
Hi sound wave,
Please consider treating lowsec incursions (and to a lesser extent - nullsec incursions) differently than hisec. It takes a lot more organization and has a lot more risk involved. Due to this, please ensure that whatever you do with hisec incursions, lowsec should end up paying more to make them al viable pre experience again.
Thanks |
Kaavod
OM NOM NOM Mining Co
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 21:44:00 -
[54] - Quote
This may be a bit outside the box, and I'm not even sure if it can be easily done with the current code, but here goes:
Decouple incursion payoffs from site completion. Instead, base them around the amount of time spent in the site, with some sort of mechanic in place to "stop the clock" if there's an obvious attempt to game the system. Let's start playing with math:
We'll call the "clock value" T.
T=(real time spent in seconds)*[(actual fleet DPS)/(actual projected DPS)]
We'll call the site type variable S.
S=[(arbitrary ISK payout)+(arbitrary LP payout)]*[1-(percentage of variation from optimal fleet size)]
In the end, an equation of (payout)=TS could be used to determine rewards, and if that is determined to need tweaking, the arbitrary value within variable S could simply be tweaked a little. |
BlitZ Kotare
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 21:57:00 -
[55] - Quote
Asmodes Reynolds wrote:Soundwave, before this thread gets out of control, I have questions for you;
What does CCP intend incursions to be?
Do you want them to draw conflict between null-sec and low-sec entities or low sec and high sec entities or both?
If your intention was to draw Null-sec entities into low sec, then you did the opposite
The CFC as a whole has abandoned them, and to my knowledge we were the only 0.0 entities bothered to run them in the first place. Pre-patch we could easily make 80-100 mill/hour running them one after another. We Only run Vanguards, Because of the logistics of moving ships and keeping the required number of people in Fleet over the long term. Post-patch the most you can make is about is about 80 mil/hour I think it averages out to be about 60 may be 65mil an hour . Which the average null sec dweller can easily make that by running anomalies in there home space. So why bother with the logistics to move ships and organize a fleet sometimes 40 jumps from home?
If your intentions were to to create conflict between high-sec entities and Losec entities.
Then you will need to widen the Profit margin between high sec incursions and Losec incursions while keeping it below what someone can make doing anomalies in sovereignty space. You need to make it enough to justify the logistics issues and the danger increase. Or my personal favorite just remove them from high sec entirely. (If Concord with a 200 man fleet of goon/test tornados In under One minute Then such invaders should be no problem lol)
do you intend them to be just an alternate activity to the existing PVE mechanics or do you wish them to pay out more?
Where do you intend that the bulk of the incentives to run these to come from?
I look forward to your responses, and I hope my comments are helpful.
I completely agree with this post. If your intention was to break Incursions to the point that they are no longer worth our time to do, you've succeeded completely. The CFC had an internal community of several hundred pilots that specialized in running Lowsec Incursions that has literally shut down overnight due to the Incursion changes. There were some compelling numbers produced by them in a series of tests, I'll go try to find the person who did them and encourage them to post right now. In my opinion, which seems to be shared by many others here, group PvE is >>>> solo PvE and should be encouraged in every way possible. I've conducted several experiments in 0.0 space since the virtual disbandment of our Incursion groups and nothing I can come up with can even scratch solo ratting in an active tanked Tengu in a Forsaken Hub from an isk/hour point of view (except maybe plexes, but more people in those = split payout, so they don't scale well). Incursions were literally the only group PvE option available.
If it wasn't your intention to have this effect, please take a close look at the changes you have made and consider tweakin accordingly. |
Media Chancel
The First One is Always Free Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 23:17:00 -
[56] - Quote
One of the problems with incursions is that the highsec ones are/were too good, and the lowsec and nullsec ones are not sufficiently profitable enough to encourage people to do those instead. |
Korgan Nailo
5ER3NITY INC Supernova Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 00:47:00 -
[57] - Quote
Media Chancel wrote:One of the problems with incursions is that the highsec ones are/were too good, and the lowsec and nullsec ones are not sufficiently profitable enough to encourage people to do those instead. To me, even if they were 10x better, I wouldn't go into low / null. But that is just me.
However, when low / null sec corps work to get their sec status good enough so they can do high sec incursions "pugging" from high sec channels, that, is a problem, and that was happening before. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
180
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 01:45:00 -
[58] - Quote
D3V1L Soulless wrote:true, building communitys are what the game is about. and incursions are a meeting point for all players where alliance and corp politics are left at the door. this should be harvested by ccp. this is what will make players come back day after and jack in to new eden.
.
Right now the nerf is on the verge of killing 2 incursion communities at least ( and MANY SUB communities). The third community by sheer numbers may last longer but it to has been signifcantly dimisnished from what I understand. I doubt a 1 million ISK bone per site will help TBH. Instead of harvestinging & sowing right now I'm seeing a salting of the ground and destruction
Unintentional bug Working as IntendedGäó...-á-á http://i.imgur.com/aYOL1.jpg
|
Lag Amplifier
Antigamers INC
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 01:49:00 -
[59] - Quote
For how much isk is on grid the payouts across the board for Incursions is a joke, ~60-70M isk an hour for Vanguard, Assaults I don't know, ~30-45 isk an hour for HQ. A shiny Vanguard fleet can have 20B isk easily with 10-12 pilots on grid. Overall Incursions are safe ONLY if you fly with competent and/or trust pilots.
Scout sites are pointless and need to be adjusted to make it worth doing. Maybe something for small T1 cruisers/BC fleets?
Vanguards over all are pointless and a waste of time to do for how long sites take and pay out. ~60-70M isk an hour with a good fleet (maybe others get better isk/per hour) and then finding replacements is hard to impossible at this point since all PUG channels are dead.
OTA - Hacking the site is fine, get an alt in a very fast ship and fit a cloak on it. But honestly you should be able to finish the site with 1 hack if your fleet is good. Hacking the site does more then just make the Mara easier to kill. As far as the Mara goes though, a closer orbit range would be good. When i fly a nightmare i can barely hit it with Scorch.
NCO - Don't really have a problem with them.
NMC - Closer orbit range on Mara.
Assaults, I've never ran them so don't know.
HQ's payouts are BAD. The sites payout is so low you make on average around ~30-45M isk an hour with people leaving between sites and having to find replacements. Need's a buff for payouts to make it worth doing for more people. Might as well run L4's, you would make more Isk for sure. |
StuRyan
Assisted Homicide Ace of Spades.
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 01:52:00 -
[60] - Quote
Here we go again, null sec players whinging about high sec. Can i remind you elitist ignorant narrow minded cowards - that in the event of people randomly working together to achieve a common goal, they should be rewarded... It is human nature to try and do things quicker and more efficiently so why do we constantly track backwards in eve when people do this?
VG sites were capable of being "Blitzed" becuase of a number of reason: 1. People invested in their equipment to make the job quicker 2. People worked together in their hundreds - whole communities were created to make isk and whole communities were created when supposidly the economy was breaking with all that extra isk pffffft. and finally 3. It was the only source of PvE that people could get into quickly make a few sites and experience other parts of the game.
How is that any different to real life.... we use a process to get something done and we are constantly looking to tune the process...
For the love of god will you move away from this Bullsh1t model of Risk versus Reward.... This model is so far of the truth in eve in so many ways i get embarrassed everytime i read a "but its RvR, we deserve more"..... STFU... Ability to work together versus Reward is one you should be concentrating on. and while you are at it... Have you ever considered looking at the demographics of average players per Prime time, Average corp size, average time in game per evening,??? It may show you that a lot of people who play the game for hours upon hours in null sec move to high sec to create isk -> call me obvious but that is a damn issue with null sec.... null sec is broken becuase vast regions are unpopulated and useless.... it is human pschology that when people make a choice in how they are going to play the game the "availability" of product / service is a high characterist when making the choice.
AND FINALLY - the issue isn't or wasn't in pay out per hour.... it was the ability for people to jump in sites and "blitz" them.... Blitzer fleets carried two notable signatures: Legion Fleet or Mach Fleet...... I dunno, is it really that obvious that perhaps these ship types shouldnt be allowed in VG sites...
All i would want is for people to get over this perception that High sec is safe.... it doesnt matter where you are in the game null sec low sec high sec wh space there are mechanics in all of these scenarios that makes jumping into a ship in high sec just as risky as jumping into a ship in null sec or low sec.... There is no diference.
Wha would i do?
Simply make VGs a site that is a stepping stone towards the more difficult ones and not allow the tier 2 BS in the sites... Conventional BS gangs cleared the sites in 10minutes+, I would even consider bringing the dificulty of assualts down making the numbers in assualt fleet such that its a VG fleet with 3 or 4 extra pilots. not like it is at the moment where it is 10. Have you ever tried recruiting 20 people? It takes forever again - another reason why assualts are not seen to be "ideal" for the time i have before the kids get back......
People like things to be quick not to be sat waiting for ever.... i like the idea of having assualts with 12 people (same as vgs) but those 12 have to without a shadow of doubt work together.... any split dps or incorrectly setup ship slows or even destroys the fleet. whilst VGs have the same risk - just not to the same degree. |
|
|
|
|
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 |