| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation
DemSal Unlimited
1248
   |
Posted - 2014.06.20 22:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Similar to little things threads, I am collecting some ideas to take forward to the devs.
What I want from you is ideas on how you would like to see incursions changed. Everything from spawn to complexity to which sites or classes need work. Now do not go asking for a huge payout buff UNLESS you have a good justification for it.
I will be contacting some of the Incursion communities, and am willing to come on comms if you wish to give me an earful rather than spend time in the forums. Or you could send me an Evemail. Whatever floats your boat
Format
Problem:
Suggestion for solution:
ie,
Problem: wasting time in competitions
Solution: Indicator that shows relative position in competition over time as a scale similar to the influence one.
Thank you for your input
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
323
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 22:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
This is cute. We've been trying to get content added to wormholes for years. What makes you think ccp is gonna waste their time adding content to incursions when they are working 
Blue-Fire Best Fire |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation
DemSal Unlimited
1248
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 22:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Aquila Sagitta wrote:What makes you think ccp is gonna waste their time adding content to incursions when they are working
Maybe I would like to see them work better.
Never hurts to ask and ask again if you didn't get an answer the first time
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
Agent Luther Sloan
Affluence Academy
17
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 22:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
Problem: Missile ships are mostly useless in incursion fleets
Solution: Add one large structure that needs to be destroyed in each VG/higher, so the cruise/torp ships have something to shoot at while the Vindis pop the frigs and the Machs/NMs pop everything else. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
32
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 06:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Agent Luther Sloan wrote:Problem: Missile ships are mostly useless in incursion fleets
Solution: Add one large structure that needs to be destroyed in each VG/higher, so the cruise/torp ships have something to shoot at while the Vindis pop the frigs and the Machs/NMs pop everything else.
This is a mechanism that already exists in 2 of 3 HQ sites, and in contests, accounts for 80-95% of the HP killed off in a TCRC. Missiles are still sub-par enough to be discouraged in every community I know of. They have enough of a niche outside incursions that they should not need to be forced into incursions.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Hopelesshobo
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation
space weaponry and trade
247
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 07:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Problem: Assaults are the only incursion size that severely restricts the ships you need to have on grid. This is one of the main reasons why relatively few people run them because once the systems get NCN walled, you need to have a specific fleet composition to run them.
Solution:
A: Eliminate the cruiser side gate
B: Open the cruiser side to all hulls
C: Restrict the cruiser side gate to allow x amount of mass to pass through per fleet. This amount should still allow a few battleships to take it with the needed logi support. The mass used by a ship in a fleet should fall off after about 10 minutes. This mechanic here could be abused by people dropping fleet to take the gate and joining in each room so their damage is counted in the site towards the fleet. So to counter this, the fleet damage counter would have to take a snapshot of the people in the fleet when people actually take the gate and not count them if they have not taken the gate while in a specific fleet. This would ensure that people who disconnect would still receive payout if they get back in site and in fleet for the end of the site.
D: At a minimum, allow command ships to take the cruiser side gate since all other battlecruisers can take it that have a larger mass.
Problem: Scouts are essentially pointless to run
Solution: Buff their payout to be roughly around L4, maybe even as far as between L4 and L5s. This will allow a couple of people to go out and still run sites if they cannot get a full fleet up.
Problem: The influence bar is turns blue very quickly and once blue, virtually stays blue all the time.
Solution: Change the effort required to an exponential formula so it takes longer at the end to fully blue the constellation.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources
Tactical Narcotics Team
2725
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 07:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Problem: Highsec incursions are some fo the best ISK generators in the game, yet are completely risk free.
Suggestion for solution: Start by giving them the same gate rats as null/lowsec. Then, drop the security status of the incursion constelations, or just remove concord from them. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
35
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 07:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
Problems: Vanguards are overcrowded
Solutions:
1: Fix scouts so they're a real stepping stone to incursion content.
2: Fix assaults so they're worth running, i.e. NCNs.
Problem: Scouts are unused, or used only by solo players messing about.
Solutions:
1: remove scouts, add another VG or AS system.
2: Up the payout and difficulty to sit between l4s and l5s, with incomming DPS that is just local tankable in a standard battleship without implants. ~ 2-3 romis or other normal grade cruisers per site and 3-5M payout with a fleet of 3-5.
Problem: Headquarters are over crowded.
Solutions:
1: fix AS sites.
Problem: Assauts are under-used, with all systems being run until NCN walled and then fleets standing down.
Solutions:
1: Increase payout such that NCNs are worth running as is.
2: Fix NCNs.
Problem: NCNs suck to run as is, to the point where they kill AS fleets and the systems end up NCN walled.
Solutions (pick one, or a combination):
1: Open up the cruiser gate and let Battleships in
2: Allow in command ships at least. Makes no sense you can't take a t2 version of the same class.
3: Remove a pocket or two entirely. The EHP required to be burned will still be approximately equal.
4: Reduce the sniper targets in the final pocket, especially as antems and yulais have fairly high alpha.
5: Eliminate the cruiser gate entirely.
6: Balance the spawns between the two gates better and open them up to all ships. (This is my most preferred solution)
Problem: Influence in highsec is a joke.
Solutions:
1: Increase rate of influence increase in highsec. 4% per hour means a single unshiny VG fleet will barely hold influence down.
2: Increase payout slightly while under influence, giving a reason to grind a new incursion.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Hopelesshobo
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation
space weaponry and trade
251
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 07:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Problem: Highsec incursions are some fo the best ISK generators in the game, yet are completely risk free.
Suggestion for solution: Start by giving them the same gate rats as null/lowsec. Then, drop the security status of the incursion constelations, or just remove concord from them.
Well, after almost 4 years of being out, I would hope that people would learn how to run them safely. Also, suicide ganks still happen to incursion runners.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012. |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Light Industries
Sick N' Twisted
835
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 07:54:00 -
[10] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Problem: Highsec incursions are some fo the best ISK generators in the game, yet are completely risk free.
Suggestion for solution: Start by giving them the same gate rats as null/lowsec. Then, drop the security status of the incursion constelations, or just remove concord from them.
Wouldn't that just mean that the Bloc's would warp in and dominate the system, given that they would be able to field much larger gank squads in addition to smaller Incursion fleets to actually run the incursions?
Oh, and also the potential for captials to end up in the system after the sec stat returns to normal?
http://meme-generator.me/media/created/d3r3t8.jpg |
|
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation
DemSal Unlimited
1253
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 07:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
Thanks guys, this is great, so far.
Oh as for incurison income being out of balance>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2hsqEvPGWQ&list=PLldrBIEnJ5hMIXwk_e8-VZb0EldJqXmg_&index=21 time mark 12:00
As for the rest, duly noted and thank you for keeping it civil, so far
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
Xayo 204
I don't pay tax to NPC
3
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 12:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
Some ideas I had in my years of min-maxing incursions
Problem: Guns being the predominant weapon system, Missiles and drones being inferior as a main weapon system.
Suggestion for solution: Give shansha tracking/optimal range disruption, and having it spread over a majority of the human fleet.
Problem: NOS being useless
Suggestion for solution: Give shansha battleships a realistic base cap. No 3800gj cap isn't realistic on a Nightmare-class battleship when my own Nightmare gets 9200. Nosferatu are an interesting mechanic to utilize, and they would be a fund tool while not being overpowered due to limited range.
Problem: Sansha's Nation Comander ripping inexperienced fleets into pieces.
Suggestion for solution: Not having a frigate with 11250 alpha, 10s rof or at least giving a warning about it in the popup you get when warping to the site.
Problem: Towers meaning everything in a contest, rats are rendered almost irrelevant in sites with a tower-bash present
Suggestion for solution: Give towers Resist and adjust their HP accordingly to keep the same ehp on them.
Problem: Assaults being inferior to VG and HQ Sites
Suggestion for solution:
1.) Change NCNs, come up with something else. Why not have an interceptor burn around collecting keys to open the next gate?
2.) Re thing the spawn positions in all the assault sites.
I like HQs where you have 1 short range and 1 long range spawn on most waves. It gives everyone a choice on what to shoot and makes all weapon systems from short range blasters to long range artillery useful all the time.
In Assaults you have only 1 spawn most of the time. The spawns are very far apart. The waves are very heavy on slow moving ships. This renders short range weapon systems almost useless.
3.) Adjust the spawn rate of Assault sites. 2 Assault fleets can clear a system very quickly and a lot of incursions have only 1 Assault system. I can see this being a problem when assault sites get more popular as a stepping stone between VGs and HQs.
Problem: Ship restrictions on acceleration gates
Suggestion for solution: Allow Capsules into the sites for people to 'take a look' without being shot. Allow Expedition Frigates (Prospect) for people that want to mine/move Lyavite and scout at the same time. Allow the Zephyr in sites, having a ship not being shot by sansha could make for some interesting game-play.
Problem: Scout Sites being a missed opportunity
Suggestion for solution: Rework them as sites designed for ~3 ships, designed to be run in the downtime you have between incursion fleets. I think they should pay out about 70% of what VG sites pay and not require dedicated logi. But having some mechanic in there to keep logistic pilots entertained would certainly be nice. You could have to save some station being shot by sansha where you need a logistics ship to rep up the station to get your payout.
Other interesting elements I could think of:
Have incursion-sansha have a chance to drop 'shortcuts'. Those shortcuts could be mobile structures only anchor-able in incursion areas.They lower the resist of all sansha (maybe every everyone, even player-ships) on grid to make for different and more diverse experience.
Those shortcuts could be dropped in a can blue to everyone, free for everyone to grab. They could be stolen or sold to the competition, etc... |
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
219
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 12:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
I think incursions are very good as they are now, no need to change them.
Payout is ok, not too much and not too little.
So i don't see any need to change them.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2402
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 13:15:00 -
[14] - Quote
My only retort to that is, unless I am mistaken there are very few low/null incursion runner fleets, ratting encompasses all of new Eden. So 30 trillion isk comes from bounties (exploration and ratting) and 10 trillion comes from incursions which are generally in high sec.
So yeah the risk vs reward is kinda off there.
[url]https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=353416&find=unread[/url] |
Viceorvirtue
The Hatchery
Team Liquid
53
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 13:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
The only problem with incursions currently is the amount of raw isk given out is roughly a 1:1 in terms of conversions. So youll get 10m raw isk for every 10k lp. This is completely different from every other isk/lp source, even in nullsec missions you only get a max of 4-5m for every 10-15k lp.
I would rather see the amount of raw isk given for incursions reduced and the lp given increased. This wouldn't ultimately change the payout of the incursion, but it would encourage people to actually finish the incursion as well as not get quite so much of their income out of raw isk. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1382
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 14:00:00 -
[16] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
My only retort to that is, unless I am mistaken there are very few low/null incursion runner fleets, ratting encompasses all of new Eden. So 30 trillion isk comes from bounties (exploration and ratting) and 10 trillion comes from incursions which are generally in high sec.
So yeah the risk vs reward is kinda off there.
They are also not risk free. Despite being 'on farm' ships including shiny ships are lost to the sites on a very regular basis. A couple of seconds of inattention at the wrong time by a Battleship pilot in an HQ site, and Logi can't react fast enough to save them if they are unlucky.
The reason they seem 'safe' is because pilots are at their keyboards, paying attention the whole time, and following the FC's instructions very attentively. Exactly the situation they should be rewarded for after all.
The one change I would like to incursions is one I've been pushing for across all area's, ratting, missions, etc.
Instead of Outuni etc.... you just get 'Sansha Battleship' 'Nightmare'. So you can't pick and choose your initial targets in any site, on any belt etc so easily. |
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
713
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 14:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
Problem: NCNs require a significantly different fleet comp to every other site
Solution: Lift the arbitrary restrictions on what hulls you can take into an NCN
Fleet Bookmarks
New Gravimetric Sites
Med Clones 2.0 |
Dave Stark
6417
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 15:02:00 -
[18] - Quote
problem: pretty much everything except 3 pirate battleship hulls (and maybe the paladin if you fly armour (which, incidentally is also terrible)), or t2 logi ships are redundant and essentially dead weight being carried.
solution: i haven't got a clue.
problem: trivial and dull.
solution: we need in-game netflix streaming.
problem: missiles are just a horrible weapon system.
solution: they need to be instant damage like every other weapon system in the game, or they'll never see the light of day in incursions.
i'm sure there are some others i can think of later. |
Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
80
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 15:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
New types of incursions; rogue drones maybe? Serpentis. A different set of objectives from them so that they play out in different ways and have different effects:
Maybe rogue drones target structures and attempt to subvert them to their own purposes; POS which are abandoned to the drone incursion produce more drones, increasing the change of the incursion spreading to neighbouring systems.
Maybe serps try and oust the faction police and mine briefly occurring gas clouds in empire space; players could contest the serp fleet for the use of these clouds. |
Anne Muutaras
Rascorp Procurement and Production
4
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 15:34:00 -
[20] - Quote
Problem: There is no benefit in running scout sites at the moment. These sites could be the place where lower-skilled players participate in 'fighting back the Sansha invastion', yet the ammo cost often outweigh the profits.
Solution: increase the payout of scout sites or rework them entirely.
Problem: hacking in override transfer array sites sometimes does not disable the rats from rapidly repairing.
Solution: I wouldn't know a solution, I expect it is a bug.
On the topic of OTA's: I think it would make the site a bit more interesting if the hackable tower would spawn at a random location. IIRC the site contains 3 'towers' but the hackable can always spawns in the same location. |
|
|
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
134
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 16:06:00 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:On the topic of OTA's: I think it would make the site a bit more interesting if the hackable tower would spawn at a random location. IIRC the site contains 3 'towers' but the hackable can always spawns in the same location
If a fleet fails to do the OTA in 5 minutes then the hacks go down and you need to re-hack a different tower in one of the other locations . |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1705
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 18:59:00 -
[22] - Quote
Relevant
+Incursions of other factions
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" |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation
DemSal Unlimited
1256
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 19:07:00 -
[23] - Quote
suuuuure, make me go through an extra 10 pages. (kidding)
Thanks for the link back, I do appreciate it and will mine that for ammo as well.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
1562
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 04:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
Problem: Highsec incursions dont "feel" like they're dangerous outside of the sites themselves
Solution: Spawn incursion rats on gates similar to lowsec and 0.0, but less powerful
Possible Nuance: Achieve the less powerful part of it by having the Sansha brawling with CONCORD or Faction Navy thus splitting fire.
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
Hero of the CSM
Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
35
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:05:00 -
[25] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:Problem: Highsec incursions dont "feel" like they're dangerous outside of the sites themselves
Solution: Spawn incursion rats on gates similar to lowsec and 0.0, but less powerful
Possible Nuance: Achieve the less powerful part of it by having the Sansha brawling with CONCORD or Faction Navy thus splitting fire.
Simpler and easier to simply limit them to scout grade rats if done.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Fronkfurter McSheebleton
The Graduates
Forged of Fire
275
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:15:00 -
[26] - Quote
They aren't going to put in gate rats, guys. It'd be too disruptive to everyone not interested in incursions to be worth the hassle. Same with changing incursion systems to lowsec.
Anyway.
==============
Problem: NCNs kill assault fleets, specifically due to the fact that T3 cruisers are needed. One could point out that other hulls can go on that side, but T3s are effectively the only thing you'll see people bring, and there are never enough of them. It's the only site in incursions where something other than a battleship is required for DPS, and the only site where a T3 will get a jobs other than shooing the fleet's drones around. On paper, that sound like it'd bring some diversity to the game and make people alter their fleet comps. In reality, people would rather make an effective fleet for the other two sites, run until there's nothing but NCNs left, then either stand down or go to HQs or Vanguards.
There's also the issue of having to run an extra logi at the end of it, one that isn't needed for the other sites. So in a lot of fleets, specificalyl late night, you'll run out of non-NCN sites and either not have enough logi around or not have enough T3's, where you could do the other sites perfectly fine.
It was a neat idea, but it's just not worth the hassle tbh, and the way assaults are treated reflects that.
Solution: Just take out the cruiser side entirely, and open up the other side to all hull types. Combine the corresponding pairs of spawns into one room if nothing else. Hell, if you want to take the easy route, just remove the restrictions on the battleship-side warpgate and switch the triggers for the subsequent gates to the room they're in, rather than the other side. Not a perfect fix by any means, but it'd get assaults up and running.
thhief ghabmoef |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
3942
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
Problem: Sansha are singled out as pirate faction of incursions
Solution: Have Kuvakei be usurped by Equilibrium of Mankind and switch over to EoM as single general incursion faction
Problem: Pirate factions left out from the fun
Solution: Add pirate faction incursions into FW low-sec and allow pirate FW to conquer systems if they manage to flip it while the incursion is in effect.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
35
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
Fronkfurter McSheebleton wrote:
Problem: NCNs kill assault fleets, specifically due to the fact that T3 cruisers are needed. One could point out that other hulls can go on that side, but T3s are effectively the only thing you'll see people bring,
This was true before tier3s/ABCs. These now substantially outperform t3s in this application.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Fronkfurter McSheebleton
The Graduates
Forged of Fire
275
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:53:00 -
[29] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Fronkfurter McSheebleton wrote:
Problem: NCNs kill assault fleets, specifically due to the fact that T3 cruisers are needed. One could point out that other hulls can go on that side, but T3s are effectively the only thing you'll see people bring,
This was true before tier3s/ABCs. These now substantially outperform t3s in this application. Same problem, different hull. Slightly more likely to be able to get people to carry them, but not much and a bigger challange to the logi to keep up.
My point is that you aren't going to see that many people bring a dedicated ship just to do half of one specific type of incursion site, unless it's an assault-specific community. You're more likely to see someone re-purpose their drone bunny ship. The exception being members of often-short-lived assault communities. (A handful of players from a specific playgroup or two does not count as "many people".)
thhief ghabmoef |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
35
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:59:00 -
[30] - Quote
Fronkfurter McSheebleton wrote:James Baboli wrote:Fronkfurter McSheebleton wrote:
Problem: NCNs kill assault fleets, specifically due to the fact that T3 cruisers are needed. One could point out that other hulls can go on that side, but T3s are effectively the only thing you'll see people bring,
This was true before tier3s/ABCs. These now substantially outperform t3s in this application. Same problem, different hull. Slightly more likely to be able to get people to carry them, but not much and a bigger challange to the logi to keep up. My point is that you aren't going to see that many people bring a dedicated ship just to do half of one specific type of incursion site, unless it's an assault-specific community. You're more likely to see someone re-purpose their drone bunny ship. The exception being members of often-short-lived assault communities. (A handful of players from a specific playgroup or two does not count as "many people".)
As I said, different hull, same problem. Not arguing the point, I think everyone who has flown AS fleets knows that the NCN is the thing that kills fleets.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |