You, Goons and all other null players are more than capable of making high sec Incursions risky. How come you don't?

And all ten are really terrible mate. Tell you what. I will stop making run of your terrible posting if you actually go back to the original topic here.

You, Goons and all other null players are more than capable of making high sec Incursions risky. How come you don't?

Someone already posted the numbers, the majority of isk in EVE comes off bounties and if anything, we should be reviewing the current bounties on battleship NPCs.

Has anyone actually considered how much of an ISK sink Dust 514 might be?

Think about it, we pay one group of dust bunnies a bunch of ISK (which they then get blown up) to go and blow up another group of dust bunnies ISK.

Sure if they werent AFK and reporting said bots.

[/Facepalm]

You still haven't learned, have you...

Those numbers that "someone" posted say that something on the order of 30% of all bounty income is Incursions.

It's not like people have to keep doing the same thing day after day. Not like a noob has to go shoot rats and PVE, he can run off and start mining right away. Joe Noob can shoot at 25K rat, or go mine 300 ISK per unit trit ... hrm, which do you think he will choose?

[/Facepalm]

You still haven't learned, have you...

Those numbers that "someone" posted say that something on the order of 30% of all bounty income is Incursions.

If true, then how can you possibly not see this as a problem, especially as there is no commensurate ISK/resource-sink for those bounties? Please, don't insult my intelligence.

Don't have to report them, just sit in local, the bots will cloak or log off. The only sad part is, bots don't get pissed off, like players do, so the griefing aspect is completely lost on them.

19% (8.6T of 45.4)

Inattentive AFK miners are a lot like incursion runners because

Nope. Incursions do not account for 19% of bounty income either.


You ready for the real answer?

Incursions account for 0% of bounty income.

No, not at all.

Just make them a bit tougher, with a bit more EWAR like neuting etc.

Marlona also seems to forget exhumers are very expensive ships designed to mine endgame minerals in null.

When miners use exhumers in high, it's as if we combat pilots would be allowed to use our capital ships to run Incursions and lv4's. I never really got why so few point this out, tbh. When Hulks were new, they were exclusively in null (sure, they cost 500m-1bil, and we were alot more poor back then). But then mining was worth the time invested as well.

I don't think miners would even care if t1 mining cruisers or retrievers died instead of Hulks - but to be honest, I somewhat feel with the miners. It's quite tragic the state of EVE mining, when you have to use an exhumer in high and the profits are still junk.

Nullsec mining needs craploads of love, and exhumers shouldn't be allowed to fly in high. Noone would whine about highsec mine ganks then either, they're just butthurt because cheap ships kill expensive ones atm. Not us gankers fault they use the wrong ship for the matter, while thinking they deserve to be AFK while doing it.

Its called moving systems and AFK cloaking has done nothing relevant on botting. And I personally doubt you even report them because you want to pad your killboard for many. If yall actually reported it might be different.

Considering there is only one exhumer with a bonus to a nullsec specific mineral, how do you conclude that these were intended to remain nullsec "endgame" ships?

Probably because miners whined they had to use t1 battleships to mine in null, and CCP figured it was about time they had an upgraded mining vessel in the line as well. Not to mention for the longest time, the Hulk was the only mining ship that could reasonably tank nullsec rats.

Plus, I may or may not have tried to use common sense too (I admit it was scary and dangerous, but worth it!).

We're looking at the economy constantly and looking at our options.

Right now we're considering everything form increasing taxes to lowering bounties across the board.

Here is an ASCII bar graph contrasting the relative enjoyment of these activities:

Mining: =
Missions: ==
Incursions: ================================================

So not only are Incursions an order of magnitude more rewarding than other ISK-generation activities involving flying in space, they are orders of magnitude more entertaining. When it comes to "utility" in the economic sense, Incursions have it all: they provide the income, they provide the player-interaction utility, and the player-competition utility (when you contest other people's sites, you have fun when you win).

Seems like Soundwave just promised us that he won't be nerfing Incursions but will instead focus on bounties via ratting, anoms, and missions. I'm very curious how that's gonna pan out - I suppose that there's (theoretically?) an absolute cap to the Incursion faucet, so it'll really emphasize the income differential between high sec Incursions and other high end activities like L5s and high level WH ops.

I guess the net result is that high sec incursion runners will become even more fantastically wealthy compared to everyone else, and Shiny Fleet will be the only way to make ISK at it?

It'll be interesting!

-Liang

--- Thread

I'll leave the details to the devblog but I'd say there is a chance the changes might be (among other things) exactly what you wrote.

To put all the above into perspective, here is how many wall-clock hours I have to run a particular activity in order to pay for a PLEX for every account involved:

Mining: 40 hours
Missions: 20 hours
Incursions: 3 hours

Here is an ASCII bar graph contrasting the relative enjoyment of these activities:

Mining: =
Missions: ==
Incursions: ================================================

That, and make hisec incursions--and level 4 missions!--much more risky. Sure you can still use your ISK 2Bn pimp-my-Mach to tear through the latter, but advanced NPC AI, omni-damage, tackling, EWAR, cap-warfare, random spawns--in other words, much closer to PvP--would mean there is a very real risk of losing it every time you hit "Accept Mission." I don't think l4 missions are too rewarding, per se, but I firmly believe that they are far too easy, given the power of most ships that do them nowadays compared to when they were newer

No, this does NOT mean nerf the ships. This means buff the challenge/risks to those ships.Especially in hisec!

You're aware that we're making adjustments to Incursions right? I've never said we didn't need to look at Incursion income in isolation, the point I made was that in terms of money coming into the economy, bounties are a massive issue. I'm not entirely sure why some of you keep insisting that it's either or.

Do Incursions need looking at? Absolutely, that's already been done and is awaiting deployment. Are Incursions the big issue in terms of isk coming into the economy? Not even remotely.

I certainly hope the "among other things" addresses the extreme risk vs reward imbalance that nullsec caused.