Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4191
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 21:23:00 -
[271] - Quote
Systemlord Rah wrote:I did multibox a fleet of 7 accounts in empire as well as in 0.0 space the only reason i did it was i tryd to reach perfection in my proffesion 100% refining max skills etc after that well mining is by far to quick to skill with no real longterm goals
(Rorqual isnt a longterm goal for mining its a support ship not a mining ship)
I startet to multibox because my new goal was to reach perfection with a fleet and learn to controll that many accounts after expierencing the feeling to manage a fleet of ships setting targets managing the hauler etc i think thats how mining should be not mining lasers the mining ship should be more like the brain of a mining operation controlling most of it send drone to spezific locations on a asteroid overview the cargo order them back etc
i know multiboxers with 15+ accounts half of them does it for the isk the other half like the challange I agree.
It's ok that mining takes a long time, and functions as a time sink. It's ok that mining requires micro management and attention to detail. BUT; it becomes a real pain in the turrets when both are combined.
I would suggest we go one way or the other with mining. This quasi AFK play makes people see botting where it may not exist, and mistake actual botting for simply distracted play.
If I need to manually activate something, I would rather it be sensors than mining lasers on a rock that can't react meaningfully.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4191
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 21:29:00 -
[272] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I would argue that mining is balanced right now, there will always be some bots but miners can at least earn a living with reasonable effort and many do actually like the process of mining. If they are afk so what? they then present targets to gankers or produce minerals for everyone including the PvP people who don't gather their own minerals. The constant attempts to make miners lives hell is tedious to me and adding in mini-games, capcha or any other mind numbing 'click to continue' mechanisms would simply introduce an annoyance into an area of the game that seems pretty much fine. I hate capcha. I would feel betrayed if it showed up inside the game.
As to balance, balance is good. But that doesn't make the game desirable, just fair.
I think we can take the human element, and make mining more practical to match this. It can still be a time sink. Learning skills already is a time sink too.
But I think mining can be improved in a way that makes botting obsolete, which I think is the best way to remove a problem. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2748
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 22:30:00 -
[273] - Quote
The best way to stop botting is to ban them. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Budan Kado
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 00:35:00 -
[274] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Mining in highsec will not be very profitable, and it shouldn't be. It takes very little work and is easily done by bots or mostly AFK. It should pay accordingly.
Players should be able to make Isk in any profession they choose in any space they live in.
Posting in another nerf highsec thread because OP thinks nullsec is the only way to play a sandbox game. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1222
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 00:39:00 -
[275] - Quote
Budan Kado wrote:Players should be able to make Isk in any profession they choose in any space they live in. You can choose a low-risk, low-income job if you want to. My suggestion doesn't take that away. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
1293
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 02:05:00 -
[276] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Kitty Bear wrote:OP is confusing ISK faucets with mining I don't remember making any of the claims you said I did.
It's called interpretation
so lets rewrite your OP to address Nul-sec bot ratting
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Bot mining ratting is extremely common because it is more than possible to mine rat enough income in highsec Nul-Sec to plex the account using a simple computer program that can run the mining ratting operation.
seems fine so far
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Solution: Make highsec Nul-Sec mining ratting not profitable enough to sustain an account all by itself.
oh .. that could be a problem. that's a shitstorm of tears and angry venting just waiting to happen. but I digress, let us continue to explore the 'merits' of your suggestion
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Economic reaction: Nearly all highsec Nul-Sec bot mining ratting operations will disappear; the majority of remaining highsec Nul-sec bot miners ratters will be characters that are used for other things as well. The only remaining characters devoted entirely to botting will have operators who run other passive income sources as well to suplement their income.
yeah .. the botting would stop, but so would normal ratting. in theory, from a game-lore perspective, it's sensible, why do concord care about npc pirate ships out in nul-sec where they have no influence. but I have a sneaky feeling your alliance friends might not be quite so keen on a development like this.
want me to carry on .... ? do you need more reasons why your suggestion is both untenable AND mindbogglingly stupid ? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
471
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 05:52:00 -
[277] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Budan Kado wrote:Players should be able to make Isk in any profession they choose in any space they live in. You can choose a low-risk, low-income job if you want to. My suggestion doesn't take that away.
Where please is mining in High sec low risk? |
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3427
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 13:00:00 -
[278] - Quote
I caught a bit of the security presentation today on boting and what was particularly interesting is that 2 alliances (not named) were responsible for 49% for all booting activity detected in EVE. Also noteworthy (and not surprising) was that most boting occurs in high-sec, which makes sense as mining in high-sec is relatively risk-free.
This is a great example of how mining could be made more interactive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8SOZxCXokg
As I suggested earlier, the way to discourage bot'ing is to incentivize and reward actual human interaction. This isn't necessarily possible with the current mining framework, but something like the above link could really be a step in the right direction. Examples:
GÇó Replace the text readout for the survey scanner with a visual graphical asteroid reference (this forces actual panning around and rewards interaction). GÇó Change the role of mining drones from actual harvesting to asteroid deployment where they would instead offer a bonus to range, duration or yield (so instead of "f" mining you would have to continually redeploy drones for mining enhancement).
Here's a radical idea: introduce a new mining siphon unit. When deployed this would automatically siphon a % of all mining lasers within say a 25km radius (with matching overlap). The caveat being that deployment automatically results in a suspect flag and actual siphon operation requires the player to continually remain within 2km of the mobile unit. What would this do? Players would be able to engage and hamper suspect "bot" operations as well create opportunities for engagements outside of "can flipping". I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4195
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 13:28:00 -
[279] - Quote
Kitty Bear wrote:yeah .. the botting would stop, but so would normal ratting. in theory, from a game-lore perspective, it's sensible, why do concord care about npc pirate ships out in nul-sec where they have no influence. but I have a sneaky feeling your alliance friends might not be quite so keen on a development like this.
want me to carry on .... ? do you need more reasons why your suggestion is both untenable AND mindbogglingly stupid ? Comparing mining, which has no meaningfully combat capable ships and builds for this, to ratting... Ratting uses combat ships.
Mining tactics, in response to hostiles, are so dumbed down you often have difficulty being certain a person is making the choices. It is not expected to find creativity, in this context.
So, what you have done here, is compare botted mining in high sec, which many agree is a potential problem, to alleged botted ratting in null. The problem with this, is that botted ratting in null does not have the same support, as fewer have any reason to expect it is a problem needing to be solved. It's null, and if the bot runs, we can camp the sucker and watch it quiver in a POS or outpost.
A straw man argument is something like this, since you take and substitute a relative non issue that people would not support, and knock it down as a bad idea. Kudos to you. If this thread had been called "lets wipe out bot ratting in null", you would have made a point.
Since you are beating an idea noone here is really interested in, I must wonder why you bothered posting it in the first place? Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
Odoman Empeer
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 14:29:00 -
[280] - Quote
He's saying that your idea to attack botting is only attacking high security players. It is ignoring the low sec ishtar bots that can make hundreds of millions an hour bot ratting, which sure beats the hell out of a single bot making 20 million an hour.
All your suggestion does is reduce the base material cost in the galaxy to nilch so that people gathering the base material (Tritanium, Pyerite, Mexallon, Isogen) can't make money off from them.
What you don't seem to understand is that this will have to be balanced with EVERY INDUSTRIAL ENDEAVOR in the game, from ships, to modules, to ammunition. What you are suggesting is that we completely crash the market prices, which will crash the cost of all items on the market except for shiny mods. Why? because it will be cheaper to produce the items.
The overall result will be that TI ships will be affordable, and everything else will be ungodly expensive for high sec players. Think 2008 prices (80 mil for a battleship and 250 mil plexes) mixed with current prices (800 mil for ded invulns, etc).
the price inbalance would be silly (edited because the word I used to mean to slow progress is not appropriate anymore due to common misuse). And you are only nerfing High Sec Mining Bots. You are not nerfing null mining bots in certain large alliances, or bot ratters. |
|
Titan Andronicus
Rookie Mission Tax Haven
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 14:38:00 -
[281] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Bot mining is extremely common because it is more than possible to mine enough income in highsec to plex the account using a simple computer program that can run the mining operation.
Solution: Make highsec mining not profitable enough to sustain an account all by itself.
Economic reaction: Nearly all highsec bot mining operations will disappear; the majority of remaining highsec bot miners will be characters that are used for other things as well. The only remaining characters devoted entirely to botting will have operators who run other passive income sources as well to suplement their income.
How to accomplish this: Reduce the demand for highsec minerals. Dramatically increase the prevalence of minerals tritanium, pyerite, mexallon, and isogen.
If normal players could mine in highsec enough for their own ships in their off time, then highsec mineral income would plummet. The economy could not sustain lots of bot miners because there simply wouldn't be enough demand for those minerals. A lot of manufacturers would refuse to pay large amounts of ISK for their minerals when they could just go mine them in a short amount of time.
I haven't been playing for long, but I have become aware of the mining 'controversy': third-party software auto-mining and human AFK mining. It doesn't happen where I live, but I do swing through a 1.0 system and see the same players in the same belts mining the same +5% asteroids, every day. Whereas I just jump to a bookmarked spot in a cluster of +10% asteroids, gobble those up, and move on.
The problems I can see are: 1. The fast CONCORD response time in a 1.0 system (plus empire navy?) encourages players to think themselves 'safe'. 2. There is a super-abundance of +5% Veldspar and Scordite, which those players I think are botting always go for, despite the proximity of the +10% ones. 3. the above doesn't encourage new players to venture further out where there are additional ores to be mined. And frankly I won't touch low-sec as I don't have the skills to survive. I'd rather buy on the market if there was anything I needed.
Solutions? From my reading I understand that Ice-harvesting used to the elephant in the room. This was made less easy by randomising the ice field placement? Why not randomise normal asteroid placement within a belt. I shouldn't be able to warp to a bookmarked point in the middle of a cluster day after day, knowing in advance where to go. If there was random placement I'd have to look for what I wanted. So would the bots.
But a human and a bot would, I think, approach that problem differently. And the speed and methods used between warping in, searching for yield, and turning on mining lasers might reveal the bots to CCP security.
I also don't think there should be any +5% or +10% asteroids in a 1.0 system. Just have normal Veldspar there, and increase the richness and abundance towards lower security space. Can't speak for null-space.
The third predictable element is the downtime at 11:00 EVE time, every day, after which the asteroids are all replenished, good as new. This advantages some players and disadvantages other players depending on their local time zones, so some players complain about the belts being completely mined out. Yes, they can look elsewhere, but it's costing them more time compared to players than can log-on immediately after downtime and grab the choicest ores. |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4195
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 14:49:00 -
[282] - Quote
Odoman Empeer wrote:He's saying that your idea to attack botting is only attacking high security players. It is ignoring the low sec ishtar bots that can make hundreds of millions an hour bot ratting, which sure beats the hell out of a single bot making 20 million an hour.
All your suggestion does is reduce the base material cost in the galaxy to nilch so that people gathering the base material (Tritanium, Pyerite, Mexallon, Isogen) can't make money off from them.
What you don't seem to understand is that this will have to be balanced with EVERY INDUSTRIAL ENDEAVOR in the game, from ships, to modules, to ammunition. What you are suggesting is that we completely crash the market prices, which will crash the cost of all items on the market except for shiny mods. Why? because it will be cheaper to produce the items.
The overall result will be that TI ships will be affordable, and everything else will be ungodly expensive for high sec players. Think 2008 prices (80 mil for a battleship and 250 mil plexes) mixed with current prices (800 mil for ded invulns, etc).
the price inbalance would be silly (edited because the word I used to mean to slow progress is not appropriate anymore due to common misuse). And you are only nerfing High Sec Mining Bots. You are not nerfing null mining bots in certain large alliances, or bot ratters. I respect your points.
Boiling down to the base concept, what about flipping the idea over, so we only speed up the mining process to the point where AFK play becomes obsolete.
Specifically, we keep all the other factors intact, demand amounts, transport issues, and relative costs.
Bolting exists strictly to take advantage of the time sink aspect of this, so basically what about eliminating that aspect? I believe automation like botting only becomes attractive when dull and repetitive play exists. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1257
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:54:00 -
[283] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Where please is mining in High sec low risk? Where is it not low-risk? Please tell me. I'm dying to know!
I'll give you the name of one of my many favorite mining systems. This is arguably the most dangerous of them all, but I like it for its danger: Odotte -- nice and safe for the mining portion but there's a tiny danger in hauling the goods out if you're not careful. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1257
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:03:00 -
[284] - Quote
Odoman Empeer wrote:What you don't seem to understand is that this will have to be balanced with EVERY INDUSTRIAL ENDEAVOR in the game, from ships, to modules, to ammunition. I'm aware of that. And what it does to the economy would leave it much closer to current Tranquility than Serenity is. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1055
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:08:00 -
[285] - Quote
Does the OP realise the only way to make mining not profitable is either to mine more to crash the prices or to seed ore/minerals in the economy to again crash the prices?
If the bots are so prevalent as some people claim they are, eliminating them would make mining more profitable which would push people to get less detectable bots to gain on the new El Dorado. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1257
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:11:00 -
[286] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Does the OP realise That's what my whole post revolved around. Did you read it? I suspect no, just like the majority of the posters here. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4199
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:32:00 -
[287] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Does the OP realise the only way to make mining not profitable is either to mine more to crash the prices or to seed ore/minerals in the economy to again crash the prices?
If the bots are so prevalent as some people claim they are, eliminating them would make mining more profitable which would push people to get less detectable bots to gain on the new El Dorado. Do you know what happens to mining, if players believe they do not need to devote the time expected currently, but a fraction of that instead?
Adaptation takes place. Players swoop in, and grab the minerals, even going so far as to promote armed escorts. Guarding miners was only a failed concept because it was too time consuming to be rewarding. With mining time reduced to a fraction of it's original, being able to pay off a few buddies so your the only one able to grab the ore is a price of doing business.
The market suddenly finds itself with minerals produced by those not needing to devote such time into sinks. Without time demands to promote and validate it's use, botting withers.
Can players still plex accounts off of high sec? Sure, just like they always could. The mineral fields are limited as needed. But bots could not expect to compete in a faster paced environment, where being able to react to more violent competition is more present.
Heck, ninja mining would become more practical, which I doubt is practical to bot. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |