| 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
1260
   |
Posted - 2014.06.22 07:59:00 -
[31] - Quote
Aren't there TWO possible solutions to the 1 gated site in assault systems?
Either remove it or put more of them in so that you carry a set of ships in preparation of different needs
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
Fronkfurter McSheebleton
The Graduates
Forged of Fire
275
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 08:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Aren't there TWO possible solutions to the 1 gated site in assault systems?
Either remove it or put more of them in so that you carry a set of ships in preparation of different needs
m
This is assuming that everyone carries an entire set of ships with them...
Putting more of them in would just make assaults even less commonly run than they already are. The idea looks fun on paper, but in practice it just hasn't worked. People can't be arsed, and I don't think anyone blames them.
It requires a different fleet composition even compared to the other two assault sites, and even if the only requirement is that 1/3 of the fleet re-ships between sites (assuming you have that many people that have brought spare ships), that's still wasting enough time to annoy people. And that's IF everyone has the right ships available. Trying to force that issue will push things further toward dedicated assault communities (lol) being the only ones who run them. Is that really what we want? To continue to have communities that all only run one kind of site?
thhief ghabmoef |
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
134
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 08:29:00 -
[33] - Quote
I see only one fast and easy solution . Remove restrictions on the cruiser side ( allow all ships ) .
If implemented it would result into :
1) NCN will retain their rat numbers and spawn and the status of the longest site .
2) NCN will still have pockets to resemble a TPPH site that is in a HQ system which also has gate to gate travel and therefore give pilots the chance to train for HQ TPPH sites while doing Assault NCN sites .
3) NCN will still retain the highest damage output of all the Assault sites in it's last pocket and by doing so will remain the best training ground for TCRC sites that are the highest damage sites in HQ systems .
4)NCN will finally be doable and no NCN walls will be left undone .
5) It is the easiest solution from coding side also %) .
So if one is to assume that Assaults are meant to train up pilots for HQ's then one would see only benefits with this one very simple but extremely required change .
Best regards
Kodavor . |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
Vertical.
637
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 09:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
Issue: Gate rats are broken for highsec incursions.
Solution: Place proper sansha camps on gates in incrusion systems.
Reason: If you were to try disrupt a system, would you open gates for free travel? Is that how you invade? Also, any attentive capsuleer would just fit 3 stabs and warp off those camps, being webbed into warp.
Edit: I doubt this would pose any threat to the incursioners ship when he's travelfitted coming in. Also, gatecamp in the region of 1-2 renyns and 2 romis or such. Just something that blows up an afk catalyst pretty quickly x)
"I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
|
Xayo 204
I don't pay tax to NPC
3
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 09:46:00 -
[35] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Aren't there TWO possible solutions to the 1 gated site in assault systems?
Either remove it or put more of them in so that you carry a set of ships in preparation of different needs
m
Even when done properly and having all the ships available the NCN site is still not desirable to run. It's a very slow site and on top of that you need a different set of ships. The combination of both makes no one bother doing it and pushes people out of assaults.
Why is it so slow?
1.)Getting to the last pocket: Too many pockets with separated fleets. Just getting to the final pocket where both parts of the fleet combine again takes often longer then doing one of the other assault sites.
2.) In the last pocket: The range problem that all assault sites suffer. But compared to the other site it's even worse since half of your fleet is sub-BS ships with limited range. While pirate Battleships fit for range can apply 600+ dps at 100km, sub-bs damage becomes anemic at that range. |
Fer'isam K'ahn
None Of One
139
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 10:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
I have been following this thread with interest and reserved my problem analysis and suggestion for later, NCN's and Scouts have been mentioned enough by now, no need to repeat it, but Fronkfurter posted what I initially wanted to post ... so I'll just quote him..
Fronkfurter McSheebleton wrote:
4.
Problem: This is a big one. The mechanics that revolve around ending incursions encourage people to be dicks. It's pretty cool when it works, but tbh, a lot of the time, it just doesn't. It ends up creating more headaches than fun gameplay.
Solution: I would suggest simply having the incursion continue for however long it normally would in highsec/lowsec, but have the mothership site only spawn the one time, and take a much longer time to actually spawn. Say, once the blue bar has been kept up for 12+ hours, or something like hat. This way you still get to fight over the mom loot, but it doesn't go down just to troll people...you can have a genuine race to kill the thing without people getting butt hurt about it. That's fun....
5.
Problem: The contest mechanisms also encourage people to be dicks. A good contest between two roughly equal fleets is fun. One really shiny fleet of regulars following around a small corp or channel that decided to give incursions a try, and farming them for faster sites, is most certainly not fun for at least half of the people involved.
Solution: Refine the mechanics beyond what we have now. The easy solution would be to split it 60/40 or something like that, provided both fleets contributed significantly to the site. Maybe 55/35/10 for three fleets. That way contests can still happen, with a clear winner, yet super-shiny fleets don't stand to gain much by following other guys around. The goal would be to look at how much faster the sites get done because of this tactic, and adjust the winning fleet's payout so that instead of profiting from picking on the little guy, they roughly break even compared to just doing a site themselves...
I would also add to the last point, that from my experience the human vs human competition has so far mostly been fun and we all act like gentleman unless there really is an issue. We usually avoid contesting the same fleet more then once, especially on purpose, some just become continuous friendly competitions until the payout really is off, then we split.
The one dissatisfying competition is vs multiboxer, usually there is no communication, no agreement, just ignored steamrolling. That's not really an issue of Incursions themselves, rather with multiboxing (which I so far dislike, but endure), but it would be great if something could make multiboxing more difficult to run in Incursions, so a real human fleets have its place in effectiveness, fun, payout etc... got no solution so far.
Are you sure your issues aren't elsewhere ?! |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1383
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 10:12:00 -
[37] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Aren't there TWO possible solutions to the 1 gated site in assault systems?
Either remove it or put more of them in so that you carry a set of ships in preparation of different needs
m
To carry a set of ships with you in highsec requires extremely convoluted freighting (& therefore at risk of gank for the potential drops also), or multiple trips moving them one by one (Also potential gank risk given value of some). There is no easy way in highsec to move a couple of Battleships for various sites plus a bunch of cruisers & battle cruisers.
Therefore carrying a set of ships with you when chasing moving events that can move after only a day or two sometimes is not a reasonable expectation under the current mechanics to base mechanics on. |
Kirluin
36
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 10:17:00 -
[38] - Quote
problem: incursions not fun for small gangs (~3-4 pilots). scouts are way too easy, and vanguards way too hard.
solution: add something in between scouts and vanguards, perhaps limited to cruiser/battlecruiser level play here, to give the small fry something to do without getting overrun by the big boys.
I run with a small crew (2 dps 1 logi usually) and we tried incursions to get something more challenging than L4 missions when we're together. Wormholes / L5s are fun but we'd like to test our skills vs the incursion AI. scout site we tried was uselessly easy but we got insta-smashed to bits in a vanguard.
well we knew it would happen in the vanguard but gave it a go anyway in the name of science  .
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc.
Illusion of Solitude
817
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 10:33:00 -
[39] - Quote
Personally, I would like to see incursions with a larger range of sites, there is a big step up in terms of skills, fits, and experience. And a significant issue regarding waiting for fleet.
The scout sites, and belt rats, could do with some work on their accessibility and rewards to allow everyone from "engaged and focused" single player, to "active and alert" pairs, to gain sufficient rewards to make them worth doing. Something that rewards concentration and not multboxing.
Missile ships are currently NOT the flavour of the month, a class of site that would make for a viable incursion missile boat experience would be very welcome.
Incursions could be a much wider opportunity for many more pilots. Sites for shiny ships and experience is good as far as it goes, but an interesting and challenging experience for lower skilled players and less optimised ships would have a real value for many more players.
Some of the love recently shown for losec would be very welcome in hi sec. It does not need to be so challenging or so rewarding, It does not need to be " all about the isk" but a wider range of activities based around incursions would make it more fun for many.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Black Canary Jnr
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
Sev3rance
109
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 10:40:00 -
[40] - Quote
Problem: Number of incursions are out of proportion.
Solution: Increase the number of incursion in 0.0
A quick google search brought up that the number of systems were / are as of 2013
Quote:
GÇó 1,212 highsec
GÇó 695 lowsec
GÇó 3,294 nullsec
GÇó 2,498 w-space
GÇó 230 dev-space
Given the number of 0.0 systems there should be more incursions there. For reference the number of incursions is, according to a post from 2014:
Quote:3 Highsec, 1 Lowsec, 3 Nullsec.
Why are the proportions so skewed? Especially when you consider 0.0 incursions create the best content, shutting down Jump bridges, setting up deadly gate camps, setting up some great PvP encounters, they really force people out of their comfort zones. Give us more so it's not a once a 5 month affair that the incursion comes to town and we get to do cool stuff.
Also a single account running in incursions gets more isk per an hour than me multiboxing 3 accounts in 0.0. That's broken. I guess i should just unsub 2 accounts and run incursions like the rest of my corpies are doing? |
|
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3167
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 14:25:00 -
[41] - Quote
Are you insane?
You start screwing with Incursions and involve CCP, there is zero doubt the ISK / hour will get hammered again (remember the quadruple nerf?).
Leave them alone, go screw with something else.
Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning.
The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
lowryder
The Dark Projekt
2
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 15:35:00 -
[42] - Quote
Problem: When logging-in in an Incursion system the chat box size resets.
Solution: Make it not do this. |
Mr Yoshine
The Ebil Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 17:02:00 -
[43] - Quote
ok as an inc runners and an inc fleet commander
why does it always need to be sansha do the pirate factions never attack?
Assaults are currently all over the place
you have one (NCN) site that takes for ever for the same pay out and is just as dangerous it makes no sense
decrease the danger or speed up that site
secondly the ratio from
VG-ASS-HQ
is off the wall
Assaults need to to be fixed / changed either speed them up or pay more, to keep in context with the others
For me id like to see more sansha or hopefully other factions
And A remaster of Assaults
Aon Ceisteanna r+¡omhphost chugam |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
35
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 17:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
lowryder wrote:Problem: When logging-in in an Incursion system the chat box size resets.
Solution: Make it not do this.
If you pin your chat boxes and select the do not move pinned stuff, it will not do this now.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation
DemSal Unlimited
1261
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 17:18:00 -
[45] - Quote
Mr Yoshine wrote:
Aon Ceisteanna r+¡omhphost chugam
Thanks, I will
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
chris1945
Ambivalence Co-operative
Black Thorne Alliance
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 17:31:00 -
[46] - Quote
Problem: Travelling to next Inc takes too much time.
Suggestion for solution: Has nothing to do especially with incursions. But add a few more gate connections. Doing 30+ jumps is a pain.
Problem: Mothership site is killed too often and it's too easy for the high reward and the high effect to other ppl in the constellation.
Suggestion for solution: Increase the minimum&maximum number of pilots to get a payout. Increase the sanshas on grid so bigger fleets are needed and the site take longer to complete.
Problem: Unbalanced site in Assaults: NCN. Nobody wants to run them. There are NCN walls after some time in all AS Systems.
Suggestion for solution: Remove split-up gates in NCN. Remove the number of sanshas on gird so it takes a shorter time to complete.
Problem: There are ~ 10 times more shield fleets than armor.
Suggestion for solution: Add bonuses to armor tanking mods. Remove negative effects of armor tanking mods.
Problem: Systems/Sites are too crowded with fleets.
Suggestion for solution: Add more sites into all of the systems. I suggest 8 sites per system. You can also reduce the respawn-timer.
Problem: Ppl only run high sec incursions. Low / 0.0 is not worth the high risk with the pirates
Suggestion for solution: Boost the low sec incursions. Higher payout. Less influence penalties (better: no influence at all and even boosts (system-wide sige+armor+info+skirmish auto-boosts for all fleets) as bringing a booster to low sec is very risky). Remove the initial gates of sites so it's harder to hang around at initial gates for pirates. Disable warp scramblers/disruptors in low sec INC constellations so ppl can enter the systems/sites with only a smaller risk.
PS: The problems I stated are facts. Go to the systems and you can watch it. So please don't argue about these facts.
+ Other sansha factions |
Vindico Atris
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 17:36:00 -
[47] - Quote
Make scouts not useless. When we don't have numbers for VG it's over, since scouts are absolutely ******* worthless. They should pay more than l4's and be do-able by 2 pilots with beastly active tanks (read: marauders, pirate BS) or 3-5 pilots using 1 logi ship and 3/4 bs. Note that 1 logi + 4 bs dps is basically half a vanguard squad, so you can combine easily and hit VG's when you have numbers.
NCN needs to get scrapped. Getting NCN walled is boring as sin. I get the concept, making us use more shiptypes and stuff, but for us nullsec runners it just doesn't work; it's a headache transporting 30+ bs around nullsec already, adding more ships isn't happening.
Also, and this is massively bias, but why are we getting a litle bit more payout than HS for NS incursions? They don't have gate rats, travel fits, blops drops and enemy sov space to deal with, and for all that we get a measly 44% isk increase and 42% lp increase? We have to constantly worry about what we're gonna lose when we get dropped, sort out warpout orders for the expensive **** or run in t1 bs hulls with nothing but t2 (no faction webs!!) and get **** poor isk/hr... |
Gavin Dax
Repercussus
RAZOR Alliance
47
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 19:00:00 -
[48] - Quote
Problem: Incursions do not create much PvP(!) content (especially low/null). There's a lot of potential to have incursions be like FW in terms of PvP content generation but also with ships larger than frigs and more dynamic (move around frequently, so there's no one particular side that has a mass assortment of PvP ships docked in station for up-shipping). Related to this - incursions just suck for small gang, as others have already said.
Solution: Make scouts good. Make them small gang. Make more similar plexes. EVE lacks small gang PvE content right now, and that has the most potential for PvP content generation. Scouts can be huge in low/null sec. If redesigned/overhauled with consideration for PvP, could do things such as limit number of ships that can take gates every minute or two (to prevent blopping site runners and encourage GF content). Scouts can create great PvP content in high sec too in the form of contests. Basically, there is a lot of potential here for fun PvP + PvE. Just my thoughts. |
Black Canary Jnr
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
Sev3rance
111
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 19:16:00 -
[49] - Quote
chris1945 wrote:Problem: Travelling to next Inc takes too much time.
Suggestion for solution: Has nothing to do especially with incursions. But add a few more gate connections. Doing 30+ jumps is a pain.
Problem: Mothership site is killed too often and it's too easy for the high reward and the high effect to other ppl in the constellation.
Suggestion for solution: Increase the minimum&maximum number of pilots to get a payout. Increase the sanshas on grid so bigger fleets are needed and the site take longer to complete.
Problem: Unbalanced site in Assaults: NCN. Nobody wants to run them. There are NCN walls after some time in all AS Systems.
Suggestion for solution: Remove split-up gates in NCN. Remove the number of sanshas on gird so it takes a shorter time to complete.
Problem: There are ~ 10 times more shield fleets than armor.
Suggestion for solution: Add bonuses to armor tanking mods. Remove negative effects of armor tanking mods.
Problem: Systems/Sites are too crowded with fleets.
Suggestion for solution: Add more sites into all of the systems. I suggest 8 sites per system. You can also reduce the respawn-timer.
Problem: Ppl only run high sec incursions. Low / 0.0 is not worth the high risk with the pirates
Suggestion for solution: Boost the low sec incursions. Higher payout. Less influence penalties (better: no influence at all and even boosts (system-wide sige+armor+info+skirmish auto-boosts for all fleets) as bringing a booster to low sec is very risky). Remove the initial gates of sites so it's harder to hang around at initial gates for pirates. Disable warp scramblers/disruptors in low sec INC constellations so ppl can enter the systems/sites with only a smaller risk.
PS: The problems I stated are facts. Go to the systems and you can watch it. So please don't argue about these facts.
+ Other sansha factions
|
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
1079
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 19:35:00 -
[50] - Quote
I can see the primary concern of most everyone involved is the dysfunction of NCN's and alternatives on how to fix that. Perhaps a better suggestion is to do away with them al together, design a new site with similar in EHP and difficulty, but designed to use the 60km travel to gates, and a medium tower bash under continuous fire, as a way of prepping and training for the HQ TCRC sites.
TCRC's; We lose the most ships to this site (even more than Mom's) and it's usually due to the player inexperience with this particular type of site, combined with 40 on grid, cluttered Coms, and little to no real way to explain it other than throw them in the pool and hope they swim.
I don't think anyone would miss the NCN's regardless of how they are tweaked, but a training ground for the more difficult TCRC's would be a helpful added advantage to the community as a whole.
Things that keep me up at night;-á
Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs?
Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
|
|
Gavin Dax
Repercussus
RAZOR Alliance
48
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 19:36:00 -
[51] - Quote
chris1945 wrote:
Problem: Ppl only run high sec incursions. Low / 0.0 is not worth the high risk with the pirates
Suggestion for solution: Boost the low sec incursions. Higher payout. Less influence penalties (better: no influence at all and even boosts (system-wide sige+armor+info+skirmish auto-boosts for all fleets) as bringing a booster to low sec is very risky). Remove the initial gates of sites so it's harder to hang around at initial gates for pirates. Disable warp scramblers/disruptors in low sec INC constellations so ppl can enter the systems/sites with only a smaller risk.
PS: The problems I stated are facts. Go to the systems and you can watch it. So please don't argue about these facts.
First, bringing a booster into low-sec is not risky. Second, low/null *is* supposed to be risky. Disabling scrams/removing gates is too much. That reduces PvP, which is bad for low/null. The solution should be to increase the incentives for people to run the incursions. Yes, the payout isn't bad but there are other problems like:
1) You can't fit bling like HS incursions, which reduces the payout you get in comparison
2) You will die more often, which reduces the payout you get in comparison
3) You will get blobbed 99% of the time, which reduces the PvP content and fun for everyone
4) You need a decent sized fleet to do low/null incursions. there is nothing for small gangs, which makes it much less likely for people to run them. Organizing fleets of 10-40 for incursions running in low/null is inherently more difficult and thus will be less popular (though it should still be an option with high payouts for those that do it) |
Scirocco B
Sanshaa True Carebers
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 20:35:00 -
[52] - Quote
Greetings from one of the few Assault FCs from The Ditanian Fleet.
Problem: Scout sites are unused.
Solution: Rework to be a 2-3 man cooperative site. RR BSs spring to mind.
Problem: Nation Consolidation Netowrk
Solution: HTFU and bring some T3s or HACs. Don't be a puss FC. I've let both into my fleets. It'll keep you running well beyond the 30 minutes it takes to do the OFCs and NCSs.
Problem: TCRCs kill sleepy or inexperienced people.
Solution: HTFU, wake up, and pay attention. DPS and Logi (BTW I LC in HQs. Havn't had a loss yet on my watch in a TCRC)
Problem: TPPH tower bash. Yep its boring.
Solution: Don't be a little baby. Grow up, life isn't always exciting.
On the whole, incursions are fine the way they are. Payout may seem to be risk free, but it is only that way when everyone is paying attention, following orders and fit correctly. Sounds a lot like how null works.
Scirocco B out. |
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
449
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 21:28:00 -
[53] - 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.
Delayed concord response like the tooltip info indicated years ago.
That would add some risk that is currently totally not present.
Either way this definitely needs to change.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Fronkfurter McSheebleton
The Graduates
Forged of Fire
275
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 22:29:00 -
[54] - Quote
Scirocco B wrote:Problem: Nation Consolidation Netowrk
Solution: HTFU and bring some T3s or HACs. Don't be a puss FC. I've let both into my fleets. It'll keep you running well beyond the 30 minutes it takes to do the OFCs and NCSs..
The problem isn't "letting" them into fleet, usually. It's finding enough of them in the first place.
thhief ghabmoef |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy
Caldari State
70
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 22:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Problem: incursions are far too mechanical and optimized, leading to very narrow fleet comps and fit requirements, no flexibility
Solution: introduce variability in the locations of spawns, the ships in each spawn, and the triggers |
Alternative Splicing
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 23:08:00 -
[56] - Quote
Most of what is wrong with incursions in terms of risk/reward could and would be solved by removing CONCORD and faction police from incursion systems. Or at least make it so Sansha rats do not shoot at criminal or blinky red pilots - why would Sansha shoot people helping them? Hisec industry is being adjusted so it is not the only answer, I would hope the one reason hisec incursions are so preferentially used (absolute security) would thus be looked at.
|
PopplerRo
16
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 23:51:00 -
[57] - Quote
Problem: Incursion runners have had it too easy for too long and become spoiled.
Potential solution:
Make incursions last half as long as they do now and spawn further apart. While keeping the same payout per site this would effectively reduce overall isk per hour.
Problem: NCNs
Potential Solution(s):
1. Make more retrictions for BC and below ships, increase their necessity.
2. Remove one pocket from the cruiser side.
3. Perhaps the easiest short term fix, remove the restriction. Personally I like the restriction and would like more sites to have them.
Problem: Content Stagnation
Potential Solution: Require specific items(consumable) to activate acceleration gates, which once activated fleet can enter after short period of time the gate locks again . Components for these 'keys' spawn amongst all incursion sites and/or blueprint for them can be bought from the concord lp store and must be manufactured first. |
fdal
POP NAVY
Knights of Tomorrow
1
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 00:26:00 -
[58] - Quote
Hello, just a couple of ideas maybe.
There was a time when incursion running meant you would take down van sites, assaults, hq then the mom. It was about the escalation and bringing the bar down and scaling fleets up to take on that task. It was a fun time.
Farming set in and well the payouts haven't changed that much, when plex was at 320 you could do 32 sites and plex your account. Given the change in the in game cost of the game itself you would have to do 72 sites to do the same thing today. LP is also good of course.
I recommend some change in the payout scheme that keeps up with the cost of the game itself and in addition would also like to see some changes to the admittance into larger sites that requires people to do the smaller ones. Some fleets just look for blue bar incursions just to take the mom down. Some fleets farm vans forever. It would be good to see fleets required to complete or present items at the gate to get admittance to the mom site that indicated they were part of the bar (influence) coming down. I would't presume to know what that mechanic would be, tags comes to mind. But it would be great to see larger fleets have a smaller site requirement before being able to take down a mom site rather than just cherry picking other pilots efforts to get to that point.
Thank you. |
Jedediah Arndtz
Warner Bros.
30
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 06:18:00 -
[59] - Quote
James Baboli wrote: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.
<3
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290394
For suggestions, especially in regards to the mothership site.
Nullsec incursions are run more often recently, the only real barricade to them is enemy space, but the spawn rate is rather out of proportion to the number of systems and pilots. I'd say up the spawn cap in nullsec to 5-8, and possibly up the isk/hr a bit.
Lowsec ones are rarely if ever run, and are probably the most dangerous of incursions. Might want to give them the highest isk/hr to compensate. |
Jedediah Arndtz
Warner Bros.
30
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 06:19:00 -
[60] - Quote
. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |