open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Highsec Incursions Imbalanced Risk to Reward
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.26 05:27:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: L''Acuto on 28/08/2011 19:44:41
A player in null sec on a diet of sanctums can earn about 45 million an hour. However, a player on a diet of vanguard incursions in high sec can earn about 100 million an hour. When done competently, high sec vanguards can be done rapidly and with out risk where as sanctums are vulnerable to ambush. I've seen a few Pirate faction battleships with multi billion isk fits in incursions.

Perhaps this is unfeasible, but Incursions should drop the security status of a system below 0.5 (become low sec). If that is unfeasible then divide the concord payout by 4 or more.

I suspect that the profitability of incursions is driving inflation which I find most notable in the GTC and PLEX trade. The last time GTC prices were this high was right before CCP's isk farmer purge; GTC prices then hit about 850 million.

Sanctums began to inject too much isk into the game before space improvements got nerfed and now Incursions are doing the same, and with a very unbalanced risk to reward ratio.

TL;DR - nerf incursions: reduce highsec payouts or have incursions reduce highsec to lowsec. As every player knows CCP is really good about nerfing.

As an after thought, another nerf could be to slow each incursion spawn rate, perhaps to one per hour.

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.08.26 07:44:00 - [2]
 

hmm. sit safe in alliance territory and run santums
trust a few random logistics pilots to my 2bil isk ship

yep,

nullsec is safer then low sec so lowsec should give 3 times the payouts as nullsec. also the best ore should be in lowsec. moon goo only in lowsec
also incursions are in null go for it

bartos100
DARK ADAMA
Terra Axiom
Posted - 2011.08.26 08:26:00 - [3]
 

incursion's make more isk but for vangards you need about 10 pilots

sanctum's you run solo so you don't have to depend on some random logi pilot (know that i fly a guardian in high sec incursion's)
and if something goes wrong it usually goes wrong big time resulting in the los of at least half the fleet costing a lot more then your 0.0 ratting BS

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.26 16:32:00 - [4]
 

I figured a couple of carebears would protest.

First of all, Herping yourDerp, in a high sec incursion, you don't need to risk your 2 billion isk faction to the competence of an unfamiliar logistics pilot. You do it because you are in the comfort of high sec.

Null sec is safer than low sec only if you are friendly to or part of the alliance controlling that space and only by the effort of those players. Trillions of isk are risked to control null sec space for which there should be ample reward. Low sec does not have to worry about bombers; low sec does not have to worry about doomsdays; low sec does not have to worry about interdiction; low sec does not have to worry about losing access to assets. Low sec is the low hanging fruit of experienced players killing inexperienced ones.

The competitive payout method of incursions drives an elitism among incursion fleets for which there are enough uber fit faction BS to fill. That supply and demand can displace less wealthy players from participating. High sec Incursion ultimately reward already rich player at a greatly reduced risk.

bartsos100, losing ships to NPCs is not risk; it is incompetence. I speak from experience.

Both of you ignored my main argument that this low risk high reward is a driver for inflation. This further displaces less wealthy players in general. High sec incursion returns don't just beat out sanctums, they beat out null sec complexes and their escalations too.

Manique
Caldari
Ominous Corp
Posted - 2011.08.26 19:23:00 - [5]
 

incursions are for low and null sec aswell. go for it.

Chunicha
Posted - 2011.08.26 20:12:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Chunicha on 26/08/2011 20:13:19
I support this idea.. it doesnt make any sense at all that if a system is invaded by Sanshas that somehow Concord can still attack on player ships, but cant attack/drive off the sanshas... if youre going to have a constellation get 'invaded' then concord should be disabled with security penalties still in effect but no ability for concord to come in to defend ships.

Either that, or don't allow any incursions to appear in hisec.

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.27 01:40:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 18:25:37
Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 01:43:45
Originally by: Manique
incursions are for low and null sec aswell. go for it.


Manique, your comment is biased.

The argument is that Incursions in high sec provide an imbalanced risk to reward ratio, the competitive payout method favors the rich, and this is a potential drive for inflation which would further favor the rich ...and I think you're attire speaks for itself.

Riveting Tale Sibling
Posted - 2011.08.27 02:13:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: L'Acuto
Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 01:43:45
Originally by: Manique
incursions are for low and null sec aswell. go for it.


Manique, your comment is idiotic.

The argument is that Incursions in high sec provide an imbalanced risk to reward ratio, the competitive payout method favors the rich, and this is a potential drive for inflation which would further favor the rich ...and I think you're attire speaks for itself.



Hey, flamebait, leave the trolling to the professionals.

There's already a whole section of you newfound Null-Sec carbears whining about how awesome High-Sec is over that way.

If you really like the profits of High-Sec so much, move there.

Payouts for incursions are already scaled to be more profitable in Low and in Null.

Useless thread is useless.

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.27 03:40:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 05:06:56
Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 03:40:50
Originally by: Sniveling Tale Sibliot
Hey, flamebait, leave the trolling to the professionals.

There's already a whole section of blah blah blah blah blah...


First of all I don't like the profits of high sec incursions, and your back handed comment begs the question ...hey, I didn't know trolling is a profession! How much isk have you earned doing that? Are you sponsored?

...and if my thread is so useless, why did you post? You mad, bro?

---

Since the comment that "incursions are for null sec as well" has been put forth and my snide response was poorly received, I'll address it.

Due to the highly hostile and competitive nature of null sec, access to it is very limited. I mention this because you don't seem to know. On the other hand high sec is near perpetually accessible.

In high sec the same fleet, corp, alliance, gang, blob, whatever can glut themselves on incursions day in and day out. The income is phenomenal even compared to level 5 missions, which are, incase you don't know, solely in low sec.

I think this is so broke that I bet if you averaged the players income earned off of incursions in high sec and compared it to the average players income earned off of incursions in null sec that the average income off of high sec incursions is significantly higher than that off of null sec incursions.

Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari
draketrain

Posted - 2011.08.27 08:13:00 - [10]
 

supporting because this is true

ugh

Chunicha
Posted - 2011.08.27 08:48:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Chunicha on 27/08/2011 08:49:33
Originally by: Riveting Tale Sibling
There's already a whole section of you newfound Null-Sec carbears whining about how awesome High-Sec is over that way.

If you really like the profits of High-Sec so much, move there.

Payouts for incursions are already scaled to be more profitable in Low and in Null.

Useless thread is useless.


Good job of selective replies because you still can't answer my question: How is it in any way logical or consistent that concord can enforce defense if a large fleet of players was to fire on another fleet of players, yet concord is somehow unable to fight off an 'invasion' by relatively weaker Sansha forces? (and they are weaker, otherwise Incursions would never get completed.) It makes no sense at all and is utterly ridiculous in any way you look at it.

Concord should be disabled during incursions in hisec, keep the security penalty, but keeping concord active is idiotically inconsistent with what is supposedly happening. Either that, or don't allow incursions in hisec.

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.08.27 09:11:00 - [12]
 

i have never done an incursions. i just know your a moron if u think they need nerf because sanctums are easier and safer to do.

also, payout in nullsec is 2 times that of highsec last i checked... cant u also assign fighters to your fleet? if not oh well still nullsec incursions exist

of course though, anyone who disagrees with you is a carebear

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.08.27 09:28:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Herping yourDerp

also, payout in nullsec is 2 times that of highsec last i checked... cant u also assign fighters to your fleet? if not oh well still nullsec incursions exist




Wrong. The payout is a couple of million more (15m for a vanguard, what is it in empire?) and how can you assign fighters when you can't get caps into the system?

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.08.27 09:45:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Danika Princip
Originally by: Herping yourDerp

also, payout in nullsec is 2 times that of highsec last i checked... cant u also assign fighters to your fleet? if not oh well still nullsec incursions exist




Wrong. The payout is a couple of million more (15m for a vanguard, what is it in empire?) and how can you assign fighters when you can't get caps into the system?


isk reward is more
LP payout is more
if cap is in system wouldnt it be possible?

doesnt matter, in the end, its safer in nullsec as long as u own the space or know how that area works

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.08.27 10:06:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Herping yourDerp
Originally by: Danika Princip
Originally by: Herping yourDerp

also, payout in nullsec is 2 times that of highsec last i checked... cant u also assign fighters to your fleet? if not oh well still nullsec incursions exist




Wrong. The payout is a couple of million more (15m for a vanguard, what is it in empire?) and how can you assign fighters when you can't get caps into the system?


isk reward is more
LP payout is more
if cap is in system wouldnt it be possible?

doesnt matter, in the end, its safer in nullsec as long as u own the space or know how that area works


And you apparently don't have the slightest clue how nullsec works.

Manique
Caldari
Ominous Corp
Posted - 2011.08.27 13:57:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Manique on 27/08/2011 14:02:45
Edited by: Manique on 27/08/2011 13:58:58
Edited by: Manique on 27/08/2011 13:58:51
Originally by: L'Acuto
Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 01:43:45
Originally by: Manique
incursions are for low and null sec aswell. go for it.


Manique, your comment is idiotic.

The argument is that Incursions in high sec provide an imbalanced risk to reward ratio, the competitive payout method favors the rich, and this is a potential drive for inflation which would further favor the rich ...and I think you're attire speaks for itself.



You have the right to your own thoughts. Also you think wrong of me.

As for inflation make it riskier to the highsec incursionists. The mechanics are there. The numeber of groups pirating/warring the incursionists is ascending.

Aineko Macx
Posted - 2011.08.27 14:32:00 - [17]
 

I agree with the basic statement that empire incursion rewards are somewhat unbalanced, warranting a moderate nerf.

Riveting Tale Sibling
Posted - 2011.08.27 14:38:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: L'Acuto


Due to the highly hostile and competitive nature of null sec, access to it is very limited. I mention this because you don't seem to know. On the other hand high sec is near perpetually accessible.

In high sec the same fleet, corp, alliance, gang, blob, whatever can glut themselves on incursions day in and day out. The income is phenomenal even compared to level 5 missions, which are, incase you don't know, solely in low sec.



Nullsec is highly hostile and competitive. Except when it's a massive freaking naptrain, and you blue everything.

In regards to your comment about average income - all you'll learn is that a vast majority of Null players aren't running incursions. Too busy ship toasting on the forums.

Someone besides Null-Sec is making money. Create more whine threads.

Riveting Tale Sibling
Posted - 2011.08.27 14:42:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Chunicha
Edited by: Chunicha on 27/08/2011 08:49:33
Originally by: Riveting Tale Sibling
There's already a whole section of you newfound Null-Sec carbears whining about how awesome High-Sec is over that way.

If you really like the profits of High-Sec so much, move there.

Payouts for incursions are already scaled to be more profitable in Low and in Null.

Useless thread is useless.


Good job of selective replies because you still can't answer my question: How is it in any way logical or consistent that concord can enforce defense if a large fleet of players was to fire on another fleet of players, yet concord is somehow unable to fight off an 'invasion' by relatively weaker Sansha forces? (and they are weaker, otherwise Incursions would never get completed.) It makes no sense at all and is utterly ridiculous in any way you look at it.

Concord should be disabled during incursions in hisec, keep the security penalty, but keeping concord active is idiotically inconsistent with what is supposedly happening. Either that, or don't allow incursions in hisec.


My reply wasn't "selective". I just decided to point out the stupidity of someone who would go through the trouble to edit someone's forum name to try to degrade them. (While failing miserably, I might add..)

I actually somewhat agree with you on this, Chun. However, seeing as how CCP probably won't ever remove Concord's involvement in High-Sec, I would suggest that they *significantly* increase Concord response time.

Think of it as Concord having to break through the Sansha hordes to get to the scene of the crime.

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.27 18:28:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: L''Acuto on 27/08/2011 18:29:07
Manique, I'm comparing the NEX attire in your portrait, pricey threads I might add, and your post's bias toward a system (high sec incursions) I'm calling out as an unbalanced risk reward ratio. I'm insinuating that you are of the uber wealthy that this system favors. Also you're comment was snide and I responded in kind, and perhaps insultingly so. I'll edit "idiotic" to "biased".

Originally by: Riveting Tale Stupidpost
...

My reply wasn't "selective". I just decided to point out the stupidity of someone who would go through the trouble to edit someone's forum name to try to degrade them. (While failing miserably, I might add..)

...


"Who's more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows?" - ah Star Wars quotes. If you're having trouble with the allegory, think of it this way, "who's more stupid, the idiot who starts the thread or the idiot who posts in it?"

Is this any better? After all you insinuate that you are a pro troll ...or are you just the mold hiding in the forgotten lunch sack under George Turklebaum's desk.

Manique
Caldari
Ominous Corp
Posted - 2011.08.27 19:50:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Manique on 27/08/2011 20:02:02
Edited by: Manique on 27/08/2011 19:52:14
Did you see me buy a monocle ? Nope.
Did you see me buy an under 200 mil pice of clothing? Yes? Why 'cose it was same set with the white pants available for my carebearish Achura caldarian character. Why did I chose the vanity? 'cose 200 mil was not so much effort after almost 5 years of playing. Also I barely pay for my game time so I see no real issue. If you do not know ... hush!

On another note if you knew high sec incursions well you would see the 2-5 bil ships handing their asses to logi pilots and so much more dangerous moments for them because people get very creative to kill this new kind or breed aka incursionists. Want to bring havoc to them and lower their income, 2-5 bil takes alot of effort to get even in the not so safe heaven of called Empire *High Security* and it will make people reconsider runing incursions if you make them loose those. Ofcorse there are hardcore incursionists and there's also alot of people who can not run them. Overal incursions won't make much difference if another special breed of people -read this as incursionionsm griefers/pirates - which I already see active makes people lose their hard worked uber pimped incursion ships or keeps them on hold by war dec-ing them all the time. Also high sec incursions means alot more close team work then null sec. Much more team work and much more trust involved each moment.


My concerns right now is low sec, which my carebearish guts tell me to avoid. Null sec ftw, high sec not so much as it gets borring.

A change to the whole incursion sistem is a must, wherever it is- high, low or null sec, it's too much isk. But then again, there is no important inflation if everybody can make ISK. No one keeps you bound to high, low or null sec. As for high sec incursions I personaly know people who keep their null sec war machines on by runnign incursions... ahh there is so much more to this. No one keeps you bound to null, low or high sec. Move arround ... opportunities are all over and can make your null sec dwellers happier with "safe money" which means more *pew-pew*. Sink the new ISK in more *pew*.

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.27 23:41:00 - [22]
 

Perhaps I should illustrate my concerns with some estimates.

tl;dr - I estimate that Incursions print an extra 0.3 to 1.0 trillion isk per day than before the Incursion expansion.

First let me stipulate the difference between generated isk and earned isk. For comparison a level 4 mission will typically generate around 15 million isk in mission rewards and bounties. A player can earn more with salvage and loot, but that is isk that has been generated previously and is circulating in the economy. I'm assuming the basic time frame for a level 4 mission is 1 hour.

As raised before, I assume the average incursionist is earning 100 million an hour, but this is isk generated or "printed" by the game. That is a 666% increase in isk printing by the game.

To elaborate further I'm going to assume that there are an average 480 incursionists generating 100 million isk an hour in high sec (3 incursions in empire, assume 2 in high sec, 6 systems per constellation, 4 incursions per system, 10 players per incursion, and using vanguards as an average).

The extra isk generated is the difference between incursion payouts and level 4 payouts, which is 85 million isk. Multiplied out over a day and the number of players involved, that becomes an extra 940 billion isk generated per day.

Fresh isk generated off of incursions might not be this large but it could easily be half or a third of this amount. Back when CCP was contemplating deleting learning skills, they considered reimbursing everyone for the learning skill books. This freaked out their economist because it would have dumped 3 trillion isk into the game in one day. Incursions achieve something similar in 3 to 10 days, and it continues.

Manique
Caldari
Ominous Corp
Posted - 2011.08.28 01:30:00 - [23]
 

your image about this is off. too much to tell you why, but all I can say for certainty is your numbers are way off.

Servant's Lord
Posted - 2011.08.28 02:20:00 - [24]
 

So what you're saying is that a group activity consisting of 10 to 70 players should be earning less than a solo activity in null sec?

L'Acuto
Posted - 2011.08.28 20:19:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Servant's Lord
So what you're saying is that a group activity consisting of 10 to 70 players should be earning less than a solo activity in null sec?


tl;dr Controlling null sec is a group activity in the hundreds and thousands that trumps that argument. The other concern is Incursion payouts create too much in game isk and devalue isk and cause inflation.

Servant's Lord, that is half of the issue. Yes I do think that incursions in high sec payout disproportionately to activities in null sec, and grossly so. Ratting or mining in null sec might be a lucrative solo activity, but establishing, conquering, and defending sov is not. I'm glad some players are finally getting exposure to the fleet experience, but controlling null sec is a group activity that requires hundreds if not thousands of players, and requires communications and intelligence that dwarfs that which is required for incursion fleets. I'm sorry you have missed out on this experience, hopefully you guys can find some commonality, numbers, and the confidence to come out and conquer some space. As the Lord, you should know that you all should have the isk to do that by now.

My argument is hypothetical, but I have been in incursion systems packed with 100+ players trying to get into high sec incursion fleets, thus I don't think my figure of 480 players across 2 high sec incursion constellations is off; but even half or a third that number, which in my observations is incredibly feasible, has a significant impact. Also I have been in a few incursion fleets so I do know the average payout on vanguards is 10 million per player. Also vanguards can be efficiently completed so that each player can earn 100 million an hour.

My other concern is inflation. As I explained before, I suspect that incursions are generating an extra 300 to 900 billion isk per day over previous or traditional sources of isk generation. Another way to express my concern is that the ratio between the total isk created and isk lost in game has been tilted by the Incursion payout method and by the strategies of elite players to maximize that source of isk. This is a game economy issue that ultimately only CCP can really answer.

http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=687

As a reference, back in 2009, RMTs were about 2% of the load but peaked the price of GTCs to 850 million. After the RMT purge GTC prices crashed to around 500 million and steadily climbed to about 600 million pre Incursion. Since the expansion, GTCs have climbed to 750+ million. I like using the GTCs because they are real evidence of the devaluation of isk - and I think it's funny that real money is traded for fake money.

Assuming 160-480 players are running incursions in high sec at any given time, they represent 0.4-1.2% of the active accounts(40k). Also if each of those players is generating 600+% more isk in game than normal (or pre incursion), then that math works out to an extra 2.4%-8% isk created in game everyday. In comparison that is also 5-15% the size of market activity across the sand box; I'm guessing a bit here based on the 4.5 trillion daily activity in 2009.

I like my crazy numbers.

Sephiroth CloneIIV
Rim Worlds Republic
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.08.29 00:51:00 - [26]
 

A crazy but very interesting idea was spoken of, have incursions make the area temporary remove concord (so it is like lowsec).

In addition to the (supposed) problem of them being too rewarding and safe, it would make things much more dynamic. Dangerous space with high rewards suddenly appearing, possibly disrupting a local area of space temporary. How people will react, who knows, but will be chaotic.

Emperor Salazar
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.29 03:12:00 - [27]
 

Supported for halving the rewards of high sec incursions and doubling low sec rewards.

Anita Pakonen
Posted - 2011.08.29 21:05:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Manique
your image about this is off. too much to tell you why, but all I can say for certainty is your numbers are way off.


i don't know what kind of numbers are you crunching but if people make over 10bil a week from blitzing hi sec incursions that should raise some questions about balance.

you don't need to wonder why there's supercaps on every corner.

and it's not even best isk around. go figure.

Eperor
Posted - 2011.08.30 10:14:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Emperor Salazar
Supported for halving the rewards of high sec incursions and doubling low sec rewards.

and tripling 0.0 rewards. that wukld be fare, 0.0 its not for free that **** its verry expsensive.

Tiny Mongo
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:16:00 - [30]
 

To clarify a few points...

1) If it takes you an hour to run a lvl 4 in highsec and you are only making 15mil an hour (15mil per mission 1 mission per hour) pre loot/salvage you are doing it wrong. In a drake I can average 20-25mil an hour.

2) For the non uber selective incursion fleet you are maybe running 5-6 vanguards an hour this equates to 45-60 million isk (incursion ninjas always seem to pop in at the last minute) before you factor in ammo spent (which is a lot). The rest comes from selling implants/capital meta items. Granted you can get into a shield fleet of nothing but basi's and Sleips/Machs and roflstomp them but that is a rare occurrence and not the norm for the casual player.

3) One of CCP's goals is to reward team work. How does nerfing the one piece of high sec content that can't be done solo or with an alt keep in line with that goal.

This is just another one of those whines similar to "blasters are fine because of brutix" or "Drake is OP because I see them everywhere" or "dramial is fine because it costs a lot." Please stop calling for nerfs to things you don't know about!


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only