Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 03:13:00 -
[1]
Mining is an extremely dull and unchallenging profession. And because it requires sitting still in one spot for long periods, it's also, uniquely, boring and dangerous. Consequently, as a profession it has been almost completely over-run with bots. Lots of people want lots of minerals, but they sure as hell don't want to stare at rocks for hours while they mine them. It's an open secret that the mineral economy of EVE is pretty much dependent on bot product, particularly the low-end minerals.
On the other hand, quite a few players do genuinely like being involved in the resource gathering/item production side of EVE, so I really don't want to see those people disenfranchised by giving in to locust-swarms of bots on the one hand or by cutting the Gordian knot and returning to reprocessing NPC items on the other.
So: how to reconcile making human players competitive with bots, whilst maintaining a player economy, whilst keeping resource gathering as a gameplay option?
Well the core idea of my proposal is this. It's a pretty drastic change to what we have now, but read the whole thing before you flip out, because some of the implications will need a little thinking about.
I propose that we get rid of mining barges. Yeah, that's right. No more Retrievers, no more Hulks, no more Mackinaws. Burn them all. That means no more strip miners either. We are however keeping the Orca and the Rorqual.
To replace them, we introduce a deployable anchorable mining module (or rather a range of them with varying characteristics - see below). The DAMM can mine asteroids out to a certain range, up to say 15 or 18Km, and every few minutes, it sends out a hauling drone to deposit the ore at either a station, a corp hangar at a POS or in the ore bay of an Orca or Rorqual. The hauler drones autopilot to the destination at back, which means they warp at 15Km, then slowboat in.
I propose a range of DAMMs roughly equivalent to the current mining barge range, starting with the lowest tier or tech 1, which has a fairly shot range and low yield, and simply mines the nearest asteroid until it is depleted, then the next and so on until all the rocks in range are gone, after which it simply stops. At the highest level, the DAMM can use mining crystals, and can be set to mine ore types in order of preference. And of course the best DAMMs produce the most yield and have the best range, meaning that they will produce more ore and need moving less often.
DAMMs will be freely attackable, even in hi-sec. They're pretty tough, about as tough as a GSC, so it will take considerable and concerted effort to destroy one. On being attacked, a DAMM alerts its owner, so you can go do something about it.
The hauler drones will also be attackable and they'll be rather easier to destroy. Luckily, they're simple, flimsy things and a DAMM can just make another one if its drone gets destroyed, but of course any ore it was carrying will be lost. So this means that DAMMs can be either destroyed or have their flow of ore interdicted. A neglected DAMM in a busy area is not likely to produce much ore for its owner.
Attacking a DAMM or a hauler drone naturally means that you are aggro'd to the owner's corp, so if Flipper O'Can starts to interfere with your property you can go and do something about it.
Each miner can anchor a maximum of 5 DAMMs. 1 Tech 1 DAMM can be anchored for every level of "Mining barge" skill and 1 Tech 2 DAMM can be anchored for every level of "Exhumers". The miner can anchor his 5 DAMMs anywhere he likes.
The Astrogeology skill will continue to give a yield bonus to DAMMs
DAMMs must be anchored at least 5000m apart, but other than that, there is no restriction on how many can be placed in a belt.
DAMMs cannot be anchored in 1.0 systems.
We're keeping the standard mining modules, so new players can still mine in Ospreys and such, and gas mining stays unchanged.
Comments & suggestions please.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 03:21:00 -
[2]
I've deliberately left specific yield numbers and other specifications vague - that's something for the balance team to consider.
The important thing is that the worst parts of mining (shooting stationary rocks and hauling rocks) are now automated, and the best gameplay parts (finding the ore, choosing the best spots, etc) are left in.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Frank Jewett
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 03:26:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Frank Jewett on 18/01/2011 03:27:22
Quote: DAMMs must be anchored at least 5000m apart, but other than that, there is no restriction on how many can be placed in a belt.
On the first day, every single belt would be completely jammed of mining structures. Do remember there are people with trillions of isks out there. These people could entirely monopolize mineral market and drive everyone else out of business unless there is a limit to how many DAMM can operated by each character.
And if the only way to get rid of these things in high-sec is war declaration, I can see small mining corp driven out of business by alliances because they simply wouldn't be able to afford the wardecs.
I think automating mining barges might work better. Give mining barges an auto-mine option, which causes the barge will continue to operate after the player logs off. The best way to kill bot is to provide better built-in options.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 03:29:00 -
[4]
Damm?????
Seriously?
You call that a troll?
Pathetic. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 03:38:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Frank Jewett Edited by: Frank Jewett on 18/01/2011 03:27:22
Quote: DAMMs must be anchored at least 5000m apart, but other than that, there is no restriction on how many can be placed in a belt.
On the first day, every single belt would be completely jammed of mining structures. Do remember there are people with trillions of isks out there. These people could entirely monopolize mineral market and drive everyone else out of business unless there is a limit to how many DAMM can operated by each character.
P sure you missed that part where I said max 5 per character.
Originally by: Frank Jewett
And if the only way to get rid of these things in high-sec is war declaration, I can see small mining corp driven out of business by alliances because they simply wouldn't be able to afford the wardecs.
Nope, I said freely attackable.
Originally by: Frank Jewett
I think automating mining barges might work better. Give mining barges an auto-mine option, which causes the barge will continue to operate after the player logs off. The best way to kill bot is to provide better built-in options.
The whole point is to stop mining being so boring and focus on actual gameplay instead. A mechanic which encourages people to log off doesn't meet that criteria. Nor does it sound very safe for the miner stuck in space. I'm going to go ahead and say that's a really bad idea.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
PC l0adletter
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 04:09:00 -
[6]
Supported.
If early 21st century people can make bot-like programs to mine for them, then why can't super-far-into-the-future people make automining spaceships?
|
mchief117
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 04:17:00 -
[7]
the main point that i belive he was trying to make is that every bot user and his great great grandpa would have 15 of these mining platforms ( 3 chars per account) deployed to cover a whole system ( multipal accounts) and come 2-3 hours after downtime there wouldnt be a spec of space rock left.
the unfortunat problem with implementing a deploy and profit idea is that it "sanctions" bot users by giving them a legal way to drop tritanium prices to .05 isk a unit. at the moment they must at least fly a ship and hauler in system so you can at least shoot there ships.
know think about entering a belt to mine only to find 150 platforms set up and having to destroy each and ever one of them
|
Seamus Donohue
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 04:39:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Seamus Donohue on 18/01/2011 04:40:47 I'm liking the idea, but I need to think it over before supporting.
In regards to making HighSec DAMMs freely attackable vs. alliances crowding out small mining corporations: isn't it already possible for large alliances to crowd out small mining corporations in the current paradigm? A large mining fleet working on a belt will get a larger share of the ore from that belt than a small mining fleet working the same belt. Each active account can currently only operate one mining barge *or* exhumer at a time while logged in, and in the proposed system each active account can only operate a certain number of DAMMs at a time around-the-clock. What difference would exist such that HighSec DAMMs must be attackable without a wardec to prevent large alliances from crowding out small mining corporations any more than is already currently possible on Tranquility?
mchief117 posted while I was typing. I think he answered my question, but I really need to get some sleep before it will make sense. __________________________________________________ Survivor of Teskanen, fan of John Rourke. |
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 05:09:00 -
[9]
Sure... remove mining and change it to another passive income. Even better... mining in specialized mining ships is so last century. We should "mine" in Logistics. Cap stable Oneiros FTW.
While we're at it, botting is the new FOTM. If "everyone" is doing it, why not boost the "profession"? Oh, and don't forget to give some love to can flippers and suicide gankers. The poor souls don't have enough fun already.
In one word, fantastic idea.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 05:12:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Rip Minner on 18/01/2011 05:14:46 I am totaly diging this ideal.
But it needs a bit more polish.
1. They only work when your loged in. This stops none active alts from droping this things all over the place.
2. The DAMM will warp away after player logs out or even disconet from game. Just like a ship.
The ideal of what you got is great but we do need to limit it to when your loged in as well as to stop this things from cluttering up all the belts too.
Hell I think it would be awsome to drop this things into mission belts when the mission has a good one haha
So lets make them hauler drones able to use gates as well for mission mining and though systems were there are no Stations. You will have to set the place were the hualer drone is to deposit it's goods.
Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
|
Rip Minner
Gallente ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 05:17:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Rip Minner on 18/01/2011 05:18:24
Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik Sure... remove mining and change it to another passive income. Even better... mining in specialized mining ships is so last century. We should "mine" in Logistics. Cap stable Oneiros FTW.
While we're at it, botting is the new FOTM. If "everyone" is doing it, why not boost the "profession"? Oh, and don't forget to give some love to can flippers and suicide gankers. The poor souls don't have enough fun already.
In one word, fantastic idea.
True be told I have can fliped to get back on my feet before lolz. This would make it so much easyer if your doing it for the isk or ore and not just to grief some newbie.
As for the suicide gankers this is a great change for them as they can now keep concord out of it. This things are Attacable even in high sec. No war dec needed.
Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
Henry Haphorn
Gallente Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 05:38:00 -
[12]
This sounds like a bad idea to begin with. As an mining player myself, I practically enjoy staring down the rocks like Chuck Norris stares down the books until he gets the information he needs. I even enjoy mining the lesser rocks like veldspar for hours on end (it's like a weird fetish of sorts) for manufacturing purposes.
To simply eliminate mining barges and exhumers will cause the following problems:
1. Unlike the learning skills (which were murdered during the last expansion), mining barges and exhumers are the mainstay of the New Eden economy (along with haulers). They are so intertwined into our economy that removing them just to combat the malicious bots is not only an epic fail waiting to happen, but simply pointless bots will simply start using ships like the Rokh, Vexor, etc. to mine as a supplement. And with the existence of cargohold rigs and modules, a vexor can have a decent cargohold to hold the ore for its class. I guess we'll have to get rid of those too, huh?
2. The price of minerals might climb a little too high for our liking given the lack of mining barges and exhumers capable of bring in the needed ores for production while players have to make due using their pvp ship as a mining ship. And don't forget that the cargohold on these ships are not up to par with that of the barges or exhumers. Don't get me wrong, I like to see tritanium being worth more ISK, but not to the point where only the wealthiest players can afford them.
3. Even if each player is limited to only 5 DAMMs (as you so nicely named them... funny though), don't forget that each system could have between two to as many of dozens of corps competing for like... what... 12 belts? And each corp has like... what... dozens (if not over a hundred) players? Those belts will dry up fast by the end of the morning and those who log in after will have nothing left.
But don't misunderstand me just yet. I like the idea of a DAMM, but just not as a main mining tool as a replacement for the barges and exhumers. Just like PI, the DAMMs can serve as a supplement. And let's also not forget that there are players like me who enjoy looking at rocks flying ships that are specifically designed for this sort of job. I tried mining in pvp ships before (from Cruisers to even Battlecruisers) and it's no fun at all when your biggest limit is the size of your cargohold. Let's also not forget that not all players have access to an Orca while the Rorquals are still not authorized to enter high-sec space (which provides the biggest mining boosts and space).
My recommendations:
At the very least, keep the limit of DAMMs to just 1 per player and have the players haul the ores themselves the same way they haul PI commodities from the customs office. Also, the DAMM should only be a suppliment to barges and exhumers (not a replacement). And let's make it more interesting. Make the DAMMs require frequent maintenance like replacing mining crystals along with daily calibrations as the various rocks disappear in the belt. Also, limit the number of DAMMs per belt to say, 7-10 per belt in addition to observing Concord regulations regarding anchoring units in belts. This way, the DAMMs won't become another nuisance like the cans and won't over load the local node with excess units.
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 06:10:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 18/01/2011 06:10:56
Originally by: Rip Minner Edited by: Rip Minner on 18/01/2011 05:18:24
Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik Sure... remove mining and change it to another passive income. Even better... mining in specialized mining ships is so last century. We should "mine" in Logistics. Cap stable Oneiros FTW.
While we're at it, botting is the new FOTM. If "everyone" is doing it, why not boost the "profession"? Oh, and don't forget to give some love to can flippers and suicide gankers. The poor souls don't have enough fun already.
In one word, fantastic idea.
True be told I have can fliped to get back on my feet before lolz. This would make it so much easyer if your doing it for the isk or ore and not just to grief some newbie.
As for the suicide gankers this is a great change for them as they can now keep concord out of it. This things are Attacable even in high sec. No war dec needed.
Uhm... you obviously missed a bit of sarcasm in my post. Oh, well,... nvm
|
Seraphina Amaranth
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 13:42:00 -
[14]
I support this. We have auto-factories, auto-research labs and auto-PI; why not automated mining?
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 13:46:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Malcanis Mining is an extremely dull and unchallenging profession. And because it requires sitting still in one spot for long periods, it's also, uniquely, boring and dangerous. Consequently, as a profession it has been almost completely over-run with bots.
Started off well. Then proposed a system that doesn't address the good start.
I don't even think attacking your damms would bother a bot. Scoop, wait till threat gone, redeploy. Bots that ignore your actions get boring real quick. It would however bother a human to varying degrees, which is the very best thing about your idea.
Your system doesn't advocate the removal of the Orca either, the single most visible abomination in the entire game, of all the vessels in eve, the Orca is the least "Eve", and all efforts should be made to remove them from the game, not barges.
Personally, I like the much-but-not-enough touted idea of actual destructive strip mining. Change the barges to be battlecruiser swift, firing mining charges to break apart asteroids, and then have to tractor and/or manouver to scoop up the debris, type of affair. The result being a much lower yield from each asteroid as much of the roid is lost as dust, perhaps even a huge percentage like 80%, but you take minerals into your hold faster than normal mining. So you gain quicker, and deny your competitors in the roids resource by destroying. Something like that anyway. Passive bad, active good.
|
D3RSK
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 14:40:00 -
[16]
What if you dont want to mine everything in the belt? Say you are mining for Kernite, but dont want any Veldspar...I see this as being more work than its worth.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 17:31:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Malcanis on 18/01/2011 17:31:40
Originally by: D3RSK What if you dont want to mine everything in the belt? Say you are mining for Kernite, but dont want any Veldspar...I see this as being more work than its worth.
Then you skill up for the fancy T2 DAMMs and set Kernite to highest priority and Veldspar to lowest. Then you only get Veld if everything else has gone. (Even if Veld wasn't your priority, it's better than nothing).
The idea is that people who want to AFK mine will get the least value from their DAMMs; people who interact closely with them will get the most.
The point of the proposal is not to give miners a passive income, but to put them on a level of equality with the botters by automating the hours of repetitive action that mining currently involves, and focusing the miners on actually making decisions, which is where they should have the advantage over the bots.
Incidentally, for the guy who was concerned that bots would automatically scoop their DAMMs when they were attacked, I don't think that it's a problem. It's more of an opportunity: when the bot turns up in a hauler to collect his large and bulky DAMMs, then that's the ideal time to gank him: destroy his hauler and therefore some or all of his DAMMs too. Remember that anchored objects take a little while to unanchor too.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 17:35:00 -
[18]
Originally by: mchief117 the main point that i belive he was trying to make is that every bot user and his great great grandpa would have 15 of these mining platforms ( 3 chars per account) deployed to cover a whole system ( multipal accounts) and come 2-3 hours after downtime there wouldnt be a spec of space rock left.
the unfortunat problem with implementing a deploy and profit idea is that it "sanctions" bot users by giving them a legal way to drop tritanium prices to .05 isk a unit. at the moment they must at least fly a ship and hauler in system so you can at least shoot there ships.
know think about entering a belt to mine only to find 150 platforms set up and having to destroy each and ever one of them
How is that different to warping to a belt to find 30 macrohulks stripping it bare?
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 17:43:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Henry Haphorn
This sounds like a bad idea to begin with. As an mining player myself, I practically enjoy staring down the rocks like Chuck Norris stares down the books until he gets the information he needs. I even enjoy mining the lesser rocks like veldspar for hours on end (it's like a weird fetish of sorts) for manufacturing purposes.
I appreciate that, but there aren't enough of your fellow fetishists to sustain the EVE economy. And you must admit that for most people mining is unbelievably boring.
Besides, you can still sit in the belt and watch your DAMMs shoot rocks if you want to. Not sure how that is so very different to watching a Hulk doing the same, apart from the RSI. Is tendon pain an essential part of your... uh... how to put this? satisfaction?
Originally by: Henry Haphorn
3. Even if each player is limited to only 5 DAMMs (as you so nicely named them... funny though), don't forget that each system could have between two to as many of dozens of corps competing for like... what... 12 belts? And each corp has like... what... dozens (if not over a hundred) players? Those belts will dry up fast by the end of the morning and those who log in after will have nothing left.
The best belts are already pounced on immediately after DT. At least with DAMMs, the late TZ guy can anchor his and get an equal bite of the cherry when the belts respawn. My idea is actually kinder to the off-TZ guys than the current situation.
Bots dont need sleep...
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
lachrymus
Gallente Tie Rodarro Corp Hail Of God Society
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 18:00:00 -
[20]
One thing about mining is that it actually is quite labour-intensive when you're the Orca pilot and you're supporting half a dozen or more ships. And if you're a piloting an exhumer, with good mining skills and a boost from a fleet Orca, you're still reasonably busy as the strip miner cycle gets down to around 200 seconds. I find myself checking planets and doing some trading, so it's not downtime...
Also, mining gives you a chance to chat over strategies with corp-mates and chat is a part of the game, no?
|
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 18:11:00 -
[21]
Originally by: lachrymus One thing about mining is that it actually is quite labour-intensive when you're the Orca pilot and you're supporting half a dozen or more ships. And if you're a piloting an exhumer, with good mining skills and a boost from a fleet Orca, you're still reasonably busy as the strip miner cycle gets down to around 200 seconds. I find myself checking planets and doing some trading, so it's not downtime...
Also, mining gives you a chance to chat over strategies with corp-mates and chat is a part of the game, no?
Dragging an ore icon every 3.3 minutes doesn't strike me as "reasonably busy", but that's subjective I suppose.
You can still chat away whilst optimising and repositioning your DAMMs can you not? My proposal still gives plenty of scope for the miner to be actively and closely involved; he just doesn't have to do the mindless parts. Indeed, the miner who just logs in, anchors 5 DAMMs and logs off isn't going to get much ore at all unless he does so in an unused systems.
Oh man did I totally forget to mention that my proposal would open up lo-sec for mining? I didn't shoulda forgetted that!
My proposal will open up lo-sec for mining. And since mining will be happening there, that means there will be scope for lo-sec industry as well.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 18:22:00 -
[22]
DUde, your idea is HORRIBLE!!
But..... IF we get dams to be anhored in low-sec and null-sec only.... And deposit drone at a central "box" that can be destroyed by a cruiser/bc sized ship or dang, and has a gun or smth.... And drops some t2 salvage, some sort of loot and all the ore it has collected through the day, that would be fun.
And yes, it would be free mining. But it would beslow mining and it wouldbe something destructable.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 18:35:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev DUde, your idea is HORRIBLE!!
But..... IF we get dams to be anhored in low-sec and null-sec only.... And deposit drone at a central "box" that can be destroyed by a cruiser/bc sized ship or dang, and has a gun or smth.... And drops some t2 salvage, some sort of loot and all the ore it has collected through the day, that would be fun.
And yes, it would be free mining. But it would beslow mining and it wouldbe something destructable.
So you think that players should be able to compete with mining macros everywhere except where mining macros actually operate?
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Henry Haphorn
Gallente Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 18:37:00 -
[24]
Like I said, I would only support it if the limit is 1 DAMM unit per player, 7-10 such units per belt, use it only as a supplemental income like PI, make it observe Concord littering regulations, and make it require constant maintenance (swapping worn-out crystals that suffer damage faster, and recalibrating the units every day) while forcing the player to haul the extracted ores from the unit to the station as you would with PI and Customs Offices.
Oh yeah, almost forgot. In a addition to the maintenance requirements, you should be forced to retarget the unit once the rock being mined is depleted.
The point of my recommendations is to make the player more active if they don't have my certain... fetish of staring blindly at rocks all day.
Other than that, not supported as giving such a unit too much power over mining barges and exhumers is a bad idea (as I already explained). And besides, your vision of these units would just make it too easy for the bots to exploit and the players who have mined their entire lives would feel like an automobile worker being replaced by a robot that can not only do their job, but can also deliver the owner a cup of coffee as well.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 20:31:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Malcanis on 18/01/2011 20:31:06
Originally by: Henry Haphorn Like I said, I would only support it if the limit is 1 DAMM unit per player, 7-10 such units per belt, use it only as a supplemental income like PI, make it observe Concord littering regulations, and make it require constant maintenance (swapping worn-out crystals that suffer damage faster, and recalibrating the units every day) while forcing the player to haul the extracted ores from the unit to the station as you would with PI and Customs Offices.
Oh yeah, almost forgot. In a addition to the maintenance requirements, you should be forced to retarget the unit once the rock being mined is depleted.
The point of my recommendations is to make the player more active if they don't have my certain... fetish of staring blindly at rocks all day.
Other than that, not supported as giving such a unit too much power over mining barges and exhumers is a bad idea (as I already explained). And besides, your vision of these units would just make it too easy for the bots to exploit and the players who have mined their entire lives would feel like an automobile worker being replaced by a robot that can not only do their job, but can also deliver the owner a cup of coffee as well.
The whole point of the proposal is to free the miner from finicky, tedious, mindless clicking. Should industrialists have to restart their queue after every unit of whatever they're making is finished?
With my proposal, the miner keeps all his advantages and counters all his disadvantages versus the mining bots. Your modifications would negate the whole point of the proposal. I know it seems like a massive change from the way we do it now, but the way we do it now is basically designed to give bots an advantage over humans, since the ability to endure hour after hour of tedious repetition is promoted over the need to respond flexibly and make intelligent decisions. That's exactly what needs reversing.
Change the mining game from "who can put up with the most mindless boredom" to "who can be the smartest" - that's my manifesto.
I want to reclaim mining for humans. I want to reclaim lo-sec for mining. I want to reclaim 0.0 for mining. Heck, I have 2 characters with Exhumers 4 tyvm, and I'd like to be able to leverage that investment - that's my interest in this declared. Right now, the only exciting thing you can do in a Hulk is get ganked.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Ogogov
Gallente Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 20:37:00 -
[26]
DAMMAGEDDON just doesn't have the same ring to it :-/
I'd suggest keeping the mining barges but giving them a different spin to the autominers. Look at what happened with PI - it's (mostly) automated but hardly profitable at this point.
I don't have a good response on how to make mining more interesting but this would at least deal with the botting problem - if there was a less rewarding yet 'legal' way to bot, this would be it.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 20:42:00 -
[27]
Losing Hulkageddon is the worst side-effect of this proposal
But never mind, there are always mission runners.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 21:32:00 -
[28]
How is it I'm the only one here seeing this is just one big fat troll and everyone is getting suckered into it?
I mean.. come on... DAMM's? ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.18 22:04:00 -
[29]
Honi qui mal y pense
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Gavjack Bunk
Gallente Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 01:57:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Malcanis I don't think that it's a problem.
Remember that anchored objects take a little while to unanchor too.
GSC's take a "little while" to kill too
|
|
Gavjack Bunk
Gallente Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 02:01:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Drake Draconis How is it I'm the only one here seeing this is just one big fat troll and everyone is getting suckered into it?
I mean.. come on... DAMM's?
Have we already reached the "ooops I posted a bad idea" stage where we get our friends to play the Troll Card?
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 04:24:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Drake Draconis How is it I'm the only one here seeing this is just one big fat troll and everyone is getting suckered into it?
I mean.. come on... DAMM's?
Have we already reached the "ooops I posted a bad idea" stage where we get our friends to play the Troll Card?
It was a troll from the start I thought.... I mean... damm.
It's a damm troll! ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
Rip Minner
Gallente ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 08:14:00 -
[33]
Damm I been dammed?
Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 08:21:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Malcanis on 19/01/2011 08:20:52 If liking cute acronyms is wrong, I dont want to be right.
Now back to whether mining in EVE should be abandoned to bots or not please.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
ScarrySpice
|
Posted - 2011.01.20 03:42:00 -
[35]
F-it do away with all the astroid belts and make them all probe out locations.
|
Henry Haphorn
Gallente Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2011.01.20 04:26:00 -
[36]
Originally by: ScarrySpice F-it do away with all the astroid belts and make them all probe out locations.
That, I can support.
To the OP: Congrats on having Exhumers skill to level 4. Got you beat. I have Exhumers level 5 and I can operate an Orca.
Anyways, I guess we're just going to be in an endless point-counter-point debate between you can me about this as both of us seem to have made up our minds. To finish this off, I understand what your point it. My point is to ensure that the miners feel active and productive while they mine the rocks. So far, I regularly check my colonies while I mine so that I can avoid the boredom.
|
Pirokobo
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.01.20 05:21:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Seamus Donohue isn't it already possible for large alliances to crowd out small mining corporations in the current paradigm? A large mining fleet working on a belt will get a larger share of the ore from that belt than a small mining fleet working the same belt.
Yes, if you place no value on invested person-hours.
Years before I was in Merch, I used to be in an empire mining corp, and we would mount full wing hulk ops and strip belts dry in short order. What I realize now is that this was a remarkable waste of time and effort.
CCP likes to talk about income sources as being point or diffuse, active or passive. Throughout the history of EVE, the point passive sources of income have always been the most lucrative because they require the least maintenance.
What the OP is trying to water down the active nature of mining. Which I endorse; if I could sit at a pos shield and have fighter-miners go fetch me ore from several AU's away, I'd be stupid not to.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
|
Posted - 2011.01.20 08:49:00 -
[38]
I have to disagree. I think that your proposal is too much like PI because it is a passive ISK generation. A good fix for mining would be one that makes it more interactive, such that macroers have difficulty running a good business while players willing to invest the time are rewarded best.
Also, the EVE economy doesn't rely on mining. It's a major part of the total ore income in EVE, but quite likely less than half of the total. A lot of ore comes from reprocessed modules also.
|
AWACS Sgt
Caldari A.W.A.C.S
|
Posted - 2011.01.20 11:10:00 -
[39]
i can see what you mean, but NO .. it might be ok for low-null space, but definently not empire, and if it was ever thought of, it should be severely limited. like 1 pr. char limited and max 5 drones. and definently destroyable.
i would much rather see a end to macro bots and similar than a end to mining industry as it would become if you had your way.
definently NOT supported .. EVER ..
|
Jaari Val'Dara
Atomic Zeppelins BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2011.01.20 11:34:00 -
[40]
Just make that DAMM under attack can't gather any ore and everything is fine. Miner no longer needs to mine, only to defend his mining operation.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |