Right!
I think you should get on training that reading comprehension to at least level III, that way you don’t look like such a fool.
Thank you, I will lead by your example.
Loks like Ax’l Thorne just a troll who pretends to be discussing a topic
3 Likes
Ah yes. The old “He disagrees with me! He must be a troll!” Stick.
How original.
Here’s the deal, kiddo.
I think, milking incursions and farming them goes against the intended nature and the spirit of why they were added. Much like how kite farmers sit in low sec faction warfare plexes to farm LP.
As far as I’m concerned, it’s an exploit. And should be fixed.
Seriously, where does any rule exist that people have to do stuff for making ISK?
Even if it is true that they try to just remove income from your group, that is a legitimate reason to do it. Shutting down the income sources of your opponents is a perfectly good reason to act. I mean, you haven’t answered the question but I am pretty sure you guys hide behind a non-wardecable CONCORD shield with your hugely buffered ships + overwhelming logiwing that cannot even be ganked halfway cost-effective and then complain that another group chose basically the only way they have left to interfere with you?
As said: The much better solution to your ‘problem’ would be to make everyone suspect who enters such an Incursion Site. May the better group win. I wonder why that isn’t what you want, it opens up all opportunity for you to deal with them whenever they show up.
so?
they’re public sites. anyone can warp to them in whatever fleet comp they want, regardless if it can clear said site.
and if they’re getting contested and not getting the payout, where’s the problem? sounds like Working As Intended™ to me.
2 Likes
As I said further up, I somewhat agreed with the idea you made, and admitted already my idea is not a perfect one, but can open up dialogue.
That isn’t a bad idea at all, and would prevent sea-gulling as well.
But on the flip side, it also opens up a box of shenanigans people like me enjoy doing to others in those situations. But at least the power to do something about it, is in your boat. It creates more free agency.
Griefing, in its definition to cause others grief, in terms of this denying content, is in the same vain of following around a newbro in an anom and killing all the rats before he can even lock them. Sure its allowable, but you can’t deny its griefing, which was your original point.
In the same vain that it doesn’t make sense to prolong the incursion, as in CONCORD’s eyes they want it gone, but at the same time why would CONCORD’s response be to prevent opposing incursion fleets from clearing sites faster or not. Its an interesting paradox. The main problem incursion runners are having is this strategy is not counter-able by any reliable means. Giving engagement timers or something would mean fleets could freely engage each other and at least in that sense, something can be done, but it doesn’t really solve the problem of closing the mom early in the focuses life, as you can simply timezone tank or something similar.
An alternative would be to allow for shield repairs on sansha, but that would also simply further that ‘griefing’ type play that might come about, but maybe people would want that. I cannot speak for all.
you’ve put forward two completely different scenarios that are not even remotely comparable. in one, we have a fleet of reasonably seasoned players in a doctrine comp and in the other we have the mythical Joe Newbro, probably in his Cormorant or similar. pretty bad argument to be making imho.
and again: how are they ‘denying content’? it’s a public site, it can be contested. sounds like it is being contested. working as intended as I said earlier.
Its denying content by preventing the dozens of groups of all sizes and level of experience with the game, from running the other sites. The difference in scenarios are extreme but similar enough to draw the comparison of finishing a site denies the content others are looking for, and if its not to make a profit from completing the site, which is the designed goal of completing it, then it is not a stretch in the slightest to claim its griefing other players gameplay.
err, no.
my dude, that is not ‘griefing’ imho.
it’s a perfectly legit form of gameplay. and who are you to say that they’re not after the payout? for all you know, they are and now they’re complaining among themselves about these nasty incursion communities that turn up and steal their sites.
and they may have other reasons for wanting the incursion gone. possibly it’s interfering with their preferred activities?
personally, i reckon hisec incursions need to be removed, nerfed into the ground as an income stream or, as suggested earlier in this thread, everyone taking the gate gets a suspect timer.
I think the missing context here is that the person doing the public site is doing it as part of an extortion attempt - ‘pay me or I will end the incursions’.
That’s super cool and it’s encouraged but the issue (and this is my inference from this point) is that even if they’re paid there’s nothing stopping the next guy from doing it. There’s so few mechanics here that prevent a group from ending the incursion that the effect is that if it works then everyone’s going to want a piece of the payoff from incursion runners. And the issue that isn’t being contested here is that it’s very difficult to stop someone running the Kundilini site. So the group being ‘paid’ protection money to can do little to effectively stop the next guy and protect their extortion racket.
Again, I’d support this if it made sense, but after a point, each new party has to pop a few Kundalinis to show they’re serious. The ecosystem moves from ‘doing the sites’ to ‘extorting incursion runners’. There would be a reasonable and constant churn of these groups (and I’d wager more than a few wouldn’t be paid so a few drop-outs). It all falls away and you can’t even have an effective extortion syndicate going after HS incursion runners.
Agree that something needs to be done about this site - this can only benefit those who are being ‘described’ as ‘griefers’ by allowing them to secure their racket.
We can obviously agree to disagree here.
damn, wish I’d thought of doing that…
2 Likes
It’s ok, you can’t know everything!
But yeah, it’s as much for you (sarcastically) as for those who don’t know 
Thinking about a compromise with ideas already said, I am thinking, for the mom site specifically, fleets have limited engagement against each other, allowing for interesting counterplay dynamics. I’m sure plenty of incursion runners would love to take part of an actual pvp doctrine in incursions. I still think this doesn’t solve the problem of immediate headshot though and think having the first bit of the incursion as unpoppable, doesn’t even have to be limited to what I described in my initial post could be as little as 24-48 hours from first spawn. Gives both sides time to form up and stage for it. Still allows for ransom/protection racket schemes. Gives those looking to “exploit” the system and continue running I means to maintain that status quo. There are a lot of ideas that can and are being put forth for a positive balanced change to this site.
Since some of us here like to RP or LARP so much in this game, I choose to tell you that I am in fact extorting Concord into paying me the absolute most amount of ISK possible in order to compensate me for shutting down the horrible Sansha Incursion, therefore farming it to the fullest extent is the correct option, as Concord are clearly more than happy to pay rather than ending it themselves, as they are very capable in doing.
It is really not my fault the space police choose to look the other way.