Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dutarro
Matari Munitions The Fendahlian Collective
21
|
Posted - 2011.12.24 17:07:00 -
[31] - Quote
Nice idea.
One comment from an astronomy nerd ... they should just be single, or maybe double asteroids in each location, not "belts". You could still have many targetable ore deposits sticking out of each roid so the gameplay is the mostly the same.
|
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.24 17:57:00 -
[32] - Quote
Actually quite like this, but yes, unfortunately the backlash from Eve's botting community would be immense.
Asuka Solo wrote:Personally, I like being able to log into Eve, check out local, see no goons, get into a hulk and warp on an ice belt without having to probe out a site first.
(...)
Make things harder for botters? In the short term, yes. Then they code smarter bots who can probe and you'll be back to square one.
If Eve can ragequit over something as small as the Nex store.. watch the rage unfold over a big change like this. Personally, I like being able to log into Eve, check out local, see no goons, get into a Tengu and warp to the 6/10 without having to... oh wait.
Also, bots that can probe... maybe. Bots that can probe quickly? No. Plus, from CCP's perspective, chances are they'd find those botters a hell of a lot easier if they four hours straight of terribad scanning to watch out for. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
239
|
Posted - 2011.12.24 19:08:00 -
[33] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Actually quite like this, but yes, unfortunately the backlash from Eve's botting community would be immense.
I fail to see the problem with this (well, all the forum whines will suck ... but once they're gone, it'll be great) |
Gerrick Palivorn
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.25 05:18:00 -
[34] - Quote
+1 Never really liked mining that much, it would give good reason to mine in lowsec. Simply because of the rapid respawn rate of the sites it'll make it so someone will need to have to scan down a new system on the roam if they want to gank the mining op (or have it preprobed). This will give the miners time to GTFO before they lose there ships. I'm not saying that this will always happen, but it is more likely.
I also agree that 0.8-1.0 systems need to have anomoly belts veldspar only. If people want more than that they'll have to scan down sites. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
273
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 17:21:00 -
[35] - Quote
I think I would like this idea more if you had one giant belt that went around the entire planet or solar system but you had to scan to find the 2 or 3 roids that you could actually mine in that belt. It would be impossible to just warp to the belt and then just travel around it because it would simply take too long. You could also use this as an excuse to add in new probes. Mining probes and maybe even a new skill for it. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX!
Support our boobies!-á[url]https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24221&find=unread[/url]
|
Seventh Seraph
AFK Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 22:10:00 -
[36] - Quote
Scan sites, eliminate 100% of belt rat bots.
also force mining bots to reset / rescan all the time.
It's a win-win imho.
+1 |
Naj Panora
Homless Nomads
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 15:32:00 -
[37] - Quote
Good idea. Make the sites with the common ores (Veld through omber and pyro) able to be scanned to 100% with 1 probe and astrometrics 1 at 16 AU. That should take care of the new player argument. |
Karl Planck
Heretic University Heretic Nation
107
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 15:51:00 -
[38] - Quote
while i like the idea in principle this would absolutely murder the activity of ratting, especially when grinding sec (which is bad enough as is).
|
Naj Panora
Homless Nomads
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 19:15:00 -
[39] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:while i like the idea in principle this would absolutely murder the activity of ratting, especially when grinding sec (which is bad enough as is).
I have a friend who has great Sec rating and he almost never kills belt rats. There are other ways to raise sec standing. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
50
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 20:06:00 -
[40] - Quote
Naj Panora wrote:Karl Planck wrote:while i like the idea in principle this would absolutely murder the activity of ratting, especially when grinding sec (which is bad enough as is).
I have a friend who has great Sec rating and he almost never kills belt rats. There are other ways to raise sec standing. Just out of interest, how? I've always done it by the old one BS each system null roams. A more boring approach would be awesome though
Also, good point on this killing ratting. I would say just have this for the high value ores, but then it wouldn't really fix botting. Although it might make it less profitable. |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic University Heretic Nation
108
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 20:58:00 -
[41] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Naj Panora wrote:Karl Planck wrote:while i like the idea in principle this would absolutely murder the activity of ratting, especially when grinding sec (which is bad enough as is).
I have a friend who has great Sec rating and he almost never kills belt rats. There are other ways to raise sec standing. Just out of interest, how? I've always done it by the old one BS each system null roams. A more boring approach would be awesome though Also, good point on this killing ratting. I would say just have this for the high value ores, but then it wouldn't really fix botting. Although it might make it less profitable.
the only other effective method i am aware of is tagging multiple lvl 4 missions through a few systems. However, this isn't too viable without either having decent sec to begin with or a lot of blues in teh area.
However I would be wiling to lose rats if I could purchase my way to good sec. |
Bunyip
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 21:32:00 -
[42] - Quote
I had this idea when I was part of the CSM. AFAIK, things were pretty balanced on like vs dislike. I wrote a whole proposal for this concept as part of my redesign of the POS system, available here.
To fix the scanning problem, I was thinking that barges (only) should be able to use the onboard scanner to find grav sites, and extend all sites in 0.8 or lower to grav only. In 1.0 and 0.9 systems (where schools are located and such) keep the sites static and visible without scanning, but maybe accessed by an acceleration gate that only allows frigates. |
Naj Panora
Homless Nomads
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 14:01:00 -
[43] - Quote
Bunyip wrote:
To fix the scanning problem, I was thinking that barges (only) should be able to use the onboard scanner to find grav sites, and extend all sites in 0.8 or lower to grav only. In 1.0 and 0.9 systems (where schools are located and such) keep the sites static and visible without scanning, but maybe accessed by an acceleration gate that only allows frigates.
This wouldn't fix the problem with afk botting seeing as the programs can use the on board scanner. The better answer would be to add an extra high slot that can only be fitted with a scan probe launcher and make the site scanable to 100% with 1 probe and astrometrics 1 at 8-16 au. anyone then could find them if there was an active player manning the controls. |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
46
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 14:13:00 -
[44] - Quote
The only losers to this change are botters and lazy players. I don't like either of them so +1 |
Aggressive Nutmeg
104
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 04:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
-1. This change won't negatively affect botters in the long run. And it might discourage new players.
It might even help botters if a proportion of suicide gankers are lazy and couldn't be arsed scanning them down all day.
Unhindered bot mining, here we come. Watch the mineral prices plummet. Never make eye contact with someone while eating a banana. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 05:18:00 -
[46] - Quote
Aggressive Nutmeg wrote:-1. This change won't negatively affect botters in the long run. And it might discourage new players. It might even help botters if a proportion of suicide gankers are lazy and couldn't be arsed scanning them down all day. Unhindered bot mining, here we come. Watch the mineral prices plummet.
mineral prices going down would not necessarily be a bad thing.
You are correct about the net effect on botting. It will be near zero. People who think scanbots are really hard are naive or terrible at programming. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 12:28:00 -
[47] - Quote
This is a super suggestion. It will make Mining more fun as well as helping eliminate Bots. I'd really love to see this put in the game.
It is a really strong suggestion. I don't belive that the Bots will easily learn how to play the Probe game. I don't think it will alienate the newer players. I'd really love to see trhis happen.
Totally +1 :) |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 12:40:00 -
[48] - Quote
Aggressive Nutmeg wrote:-1. This change won't negatively affect botters in the long run. And it might discourage new players. It might even help botters if a proportion of suicide gankers are lazy and couldn't be arsed scanning them down all day. Unhindered bot mining, here we come. Watch the mineral prices plummet.
Hi Aggressive Nutmeg,
I hear what you are saying. But from my limited understanding the Bot Programs have to "interface" with the game via a simulated keyboard and mouse and by "Seeing" and then interpreting the screen. I think this could make scanning very hard for Bot programs. Unless of course there is a sure-fire "method" that could become an algorithm that will always render a resolved "Site" then I don't see it happening. The "Bot" program would have to "See" the little arrows on the probe squares as well as interpret the image past the spinning spheres - as well as "Seeing" the sites and, (in 3 dimensions), allign the probe formation over the target sites. . . I just see the Probe mini game as the closest thing to a Captcha EvE has.
I really think/hope it would defeat the Bots. I hope you are wrong - but I'm not a programmer and you may see how to get past the above issues - so it could come to be that what you predict is what happens.
But I still think this is the most elegant suggestion I've seen for ages. It will add gameplay. It will add fun to mining. So even if it doesn't get rid of Bots it still has merit. If it can reduce Botting then that is just a brilliant bonus! |
Benteen
Drone A.I. Servicing Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 20:19:00 -
[49] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote:Aggressive Nutmeg wrote:-1. This change won't negatively affect botters in the long run. And it might discourage new players. It might even help botters if a proportion of suicide gankers are lazy and couldn't be arsed scanning them down all day. Unhindered bot mining, here we come. Watch the mineral prices plummet. Hi Aggressive Nutmeg, I hear what you are saying. But from my limited understanding the Bot Programs have to "interface" with the game via a simulated keyboard and mouse and by "Seeing" and then interpreting the screen. I think this could make scanning very hard for Bot programs. Unless of course there is a sure-fire "method" that could become an algorithm that will always render a resolved "Site" then I don't see it happening. The "Bot" program would have to "See" the little arrows on the probe squares as well as interpret the image past the spinning spheres - as well as "Seeing" the sites and, (in 3 dimensions), align the probe formation over the target sites. . . I just see the Probe mini game as the closest thing to a Captcha EvE has. I really think/hope it would defeat the Bots. I hope you are wrong - but I'm not a programmer and you may see how to get past the above issues - so it could come to be that what you predict is what happens. But I still think this is the most elegant suggestion I've seen for ages. It will add game play. It will add fun to mining. So even if it doesn't get rid of Bots it still has merit. If it can reduce Botting then that is just a brilliant bonus!
It'd certainly add something to mining other than to warp around, lock the nearest shiney rock and shoot it until you've got it all in the hold then move to the next one. I'd love to see this in as it'll also make it a bit more complex for the Suicide Gankers to hit a normal miner... I'd assume a botter program would have to scan every so often as an algorithm which would probably make it easier to spot as it'd be scanning in a more regular pattern than a real player would.
The only losers would be the lazy people and potentially the botters if it was implemented as has been discussed here and the new players are taught to scan (I never saw a tutorial for it though they might have one now). |
Tina Mori
Maniacal Miners INC Cosmic Maniacs
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:39:00 -
[50] - Quote
You are aware that Ice used to be available in very hi-sec system, ie Jita?
CCP removed all ore from high traffic systems because of lag, now the lag problem is fixed, no ore has been put back
If you look, you`ll find that Caldari regions have the least amount of Ice already, because of it |
|
Tobiaz
Spacerats
75
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 15:58:00 -
[51] - Quote
I support this idea.
Make the sites contain only one type of ore, so people can look for ore-specific signatures instead of stripping sites of only a specific ore and letting it despawn.
Give sites a despawn timer (unless they are mined out) of a week. This way it will reduce the amount of available resources in busy areas and create signature-rich pockets that explorers can search for (or a few rare null-sec signatures in high sec).
A big advantage of using this system is that mining involves more steps and types of players. It is also much easier to tweak this system to modifiy spawnrate and location. http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif
How about fixing image-linking on the forums, CCP? I want to see signatures! |
Adrian Slave Toucher
Slave Touchers
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 00:57:00 -
[52] - Quote
+1...
Also, support touching your slaves |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1354
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 05:33:00 -
[53] - Quote
Voddick wrote:IssueRespawning belts just donGÇÖt make sense from a RP or anti-bot perspective. Remove them from the game and spawn random, small ice and ore Gravimetric sites instead. CriteriaIt is critical that these mining sites in empire be accessible from the system scanner and not probes to ensure mining remains GÇÿnew-playerGÇÖ friendly. These sites should be small enough to last 30 minutes or so (40,000 m3) in a hulk before running out of ore. Also, a site despawn time of 3 to 4 hours should be set to ensure that fresh sites are always available. Low SecLow sec should have full access to the high end ores and ice currently found only in null sec. They should also offer increasing quantities of ore to facilitate large, group mining ops. Everyone knows that no one bothers mining in low sec because the ore value is trivial. Low sec is every bit, if not more dangerous than null sec. The rewards should reflect this. Null SecLow and null sec mining sites should require scan probes to find to reflect their difficulty and value. Without this mechanic low sec roams would consist of jumping into a system, hitting scan and then warping in on a GÇ£helplessGÇ¥ mining op. With probes, the miners can at least have a fighting chance with the directional scan and local.
Bots can be programmed to scan you know.
And some of us just dont care about RP.
So no. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
470
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 13:39:00 -
[54] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:Bots can be programmed to scan you know. Not that I particularly agree with the OP, but do you have any evidence that there is a scanning bot? I've certainly never heard of one.
--Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK-- |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1374
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 17:05:00 -
[55] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:Bots can be programmed to scan you know. Not that I particularly agree with the OP, but do you have any evidence that there is a scanning bot? I've certainly never heard of one.
If they can mine roids or gank rats... they can use d-scan or probes.
Its all in the config.
As for substantive evidence? I have none.
But it doesn't take allot of imagination and common sense to see its plausible. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
485
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 17:29:00 -
[56] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:If they can mine roids or gank rats... they can use d-scan or probes.
Its all in the config.
As for substantive evidence? I have none.
But it doesn't take allot of imagination and common sense to see its plausible. I especially like the part where you use evidence to support your hypothesis.
Probing is different from utilizing d-scan or killing rats, due to the fact that it requires intuitive use of a 3 dimensional interface. But if you wish for evidence beyond that, just look at the bots available. None of them have probing functionality.
It doesn't take a lot of imagination or common sense to claim that incursion bots are plausible, that doesn't mean it's technically possible or viable. No matter how much imagination you have, technical limitations are technical limitations.
--Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK-- |
Zircon Dasher
129
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:12:00 -
[57] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote: But if you wish for evidence beyond that, just look at the bots available. None of them have probing functionality.
It doesn't take a lot of imagination or common sense to claim that incursion bots are plausible, that doesn't mean it's technically possible or viable. No matter how much imagination you have, technical limitations are technical limitations.
"I was on the sites that sell botting programs just to do research...... honest!!"
Discussing the way someone may go about cheating is frowned upon by CCP. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
487
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:20:00 -
[58] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote: But if you wish for evidence beyond that, just look at the bots available. None of them have probing functionality.
It doesn't take a lot of imagination or common sense to claim that incursion bots are plausible, that doesn't mean it's technically possible or viable. No matter how much imagination you have, technical limitations are technical limitations.
"I was on the sites that sell botting programs just to do research...... honest!!" Discussing the way someone may go about cheating is frowned upon by CCP. Bots and their capabilities are well known, discussion of them is frowned upon only when you are naming them, linking to sites or (to a lesser degree) promoting their use.
--Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK-- |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1278
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 21:05:00 -
[59] - Quote
I've suggesting this for a while. Give barges and exhumers a new high slot expressly built for a new "mining probe launcher" that fires specialized probes that only detect grav sites. Remove belts and replace them with grav sites that always respawn in system during downtime. It won't eliminate botting, but it will make it harder. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
Kneebone
K-H Light Industries
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.06 00:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
The ramifications of removing static belts goes beyond mining and I feel are being overlooked by many who are posting in this thread. There are plenty of people that rat in High/Low/Null for bounties, rep grinding, ISK making, etc. The static belts also give way to PvP in the belts. Removing static belts in low/null and requiring them to be scanned with a probe launcher will be a massive change to the fabric of low and null.
CCP would need to balance the mining aspect with the PvE and PvP relationships of belts. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |