Please elaborate. I'm not saying I don't believe it but rather this is merely an outlier of what one person on one account can obtain. Yes, there is loot but from my estimates the best liquid isk/hour you can get in a T1 BS is about 20m. Tack on the time it takes to salvage the good wrecks AND sell it...I dunno. 50m/hr seems like one hell of a stretch.

You do realize he was mocking anyone who actually thinks CCP should account for drunk players when balancing?

1bil/hour for the entire fleet, that is at least my assumption of that claim...

My main concern with all the talk about nerfing incursion payouts is what it will do to those who use it as their means of income for PvP.

Less money earned in a (relatively) safe environment in highsec incursions might lead to fewer people in lowsec overall. I include myself in this statistic, because if I can't earn as much ISK, I can't buy the ships that I will inevitably lose in lowsec PvP (given the current state of the game and my preference to fly solo). Therefore I will spend less time PvPing in lowsec; it's as simple as that.

It's not that what you say isn't true, it's not for me to say what you will or will not do, but there's something fundamentally flawed in your statement as a point of argument for EVE. It's the expectation that PvE and PvP ought to be separate activities. That's how Themepark MMOs typically work, they have loads of PvE where your character gets stronger then you get to PvP if you wish in an entirely separate zone. But EVE is supposed to be a Sandbox PvP MMO, and that's simply not how those games are supposed to function.

High Sec is just totally unbalanced atm, Incursions is just the worst of it. Plenty of players are willing to PvE in areas open to PvP, but few are going to do so if the risk vs reward calculation doesn't add up, and with high rewards available in relatively risk free High Sec it's not entirely surprising where you find most players making their ISK.

Before someone else says something like "carebears" are never going to leave High Sec, so stop trying to push them out to Null, WH, or Low Sec. That's fine with me, but the cost for those players that choose to always avoid risks is that they ought to always be the lowest income players in the game by a sizable margin. ..and no, playing the market in High Sec although lacking PvP combat is not devoid of player competition and risk so doesn't fall into the same category as the PvP phobic PvEer.

I agree. However, in order for the risk vs rewards to be balanced, Lowsec would have to by a HUGE margin the most profitable place to be in, because despite the intention of the developers Nullsec is about as dangerous as Hisec, if not less. Moving all Level 4s to Lowsec is what a lot of people want, but would **** off WAY too many people and would never happen. However, something along the lines of Lowsec level 4s paying out two to five times as much as hisec level 4s is not as ridiculous as it sounds and might work.

Get T2 guns, take some tank off, blitz the missions....maelstroms are particularly good at it.

Nice troll bro.

Please link me to a single claim of 1bn/hour

Given that the only risk in deep blue nullsec is that you get drunk / do something really stupid, you really can't argue that incursions need a nerf without advocating a sanctum nerf in the process.

Hey look, someone seems to be doing something with their anti-incursion fervour. Like, I mean, more than just moaning and wailing - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=55792

My money is on little more than bigtalk and lots of back-slapping "Go, bro, go!", but still at least he's trying to do **something** other than these bleatfests.

Gonna give him a +1 for at least trying something.

Good god you are dumb as hell.

The difference is that the security offered in null sec is PLAYER DRIVEN. Intel channels, defense fleets, etc. In high sec , hurrrrr Concord. Sure null is safe, because players make it so. And yet, there are still risks (cloakie gangs, fast moving gangs, etc).

The security in nullsec is player driven, the profitability is hard coded in.
The security in highsec is hard coded in, the profitability is player driven.

In null, players have the ability to act as something that increases the risk of isk making there.
In HS, players have the ability to act as something that decreases the profitability of making isk there.

As a rule, PVE that requires coordination and teamwork should pay more than PVE that can be done solo.

Null still pays more than highsec, despite the PVE being done solo.

Why are you still complaining?

Oddly enough, I don't think you realize this but I agree with you completely. My problem is with the massive isk flow increase that there has been in this game. I think incursions all around should be nerfed, at least in terms of isk generation.

Why are you having such a hard time understanding inflation?

So I spent all day today running Incursions for the first time after hearing how lucrative it is.

I would agree that it's more fun than L4s when you have a friendly fleet to keep you company but as far as isk goes I do not see where people are pulling this 1b/hr figure from.

I spent a few hours running Vanguards and a few hours running HQs and a generous figure would be 40m/hr for the Vanguards and 60m for the HQs, not including the hour or two it took to both find a fleet and get everyone in the first site, and then between each site we would always have to replace members that had to leave.

Now, I could have just had bad luck with fleets, but even if I went into the channels and instantly found a fleet that blew through HQs at the fastest possible rate I couldn't possibly see breaking 100 - 120m/hr. Now, I am excluding LP from this, and I am aware that it can make up for a good proportion of the isk gained, but I would be really hard to pressed to believe that CONCORD LPs are worth the~12,000isk/LP they would need to be in order to push that 100m/hr to 1b/hr.

So... where is this 1b/hr figure coming from?