Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.03 20:25:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Tyme Xandr on 03/04/2011 20:31:09 I have recently posted this in Features and Ideas section, figured I would propose this in a more clear and concise and less cynical manner. Also, I need to mention I am not a miner and havent mined in maybe a year? (Excluding gas mining in WHs).
The issue with macro miners right now is that making a program is very easy using Click Bots. These macro miners can sit in a few fields every day mining them and making it cheaper for materials as those who only mine legitimately.
The Big Change: Keep the same amount of asteroid belts we currently have accessible through the overview, however change the amount of asteroids and the amount of materials inside of asteroids to a much lower amount. ---- Example: Bring asteroid count in each field down to 20% of current asteroids. Lower the amount of material in the asteroid down 60%. ---- Reason: This will limit the amount of asteroids available for strictly botters and they would have to move systems often and cant occupy a single system 23 hours a day within a few belts. Keeping warp to asteroid belts should still be around only because newer players on day one and two are confused enough about where to go to mine. Through the rookie chat they can be directed towards the Exploration agent for reasons explained below if they need more asteroids.
BIG CHANGE PART 2: Increase gravimetric sites in a system to compensate for lost asteroids. That 80% of materials that has been taken from the asteroid belts would instead be 'spawned' in many (daily) randomly placed gravimetric sites. ---- Reason: Miners will now have to scan down grav sites in their system of choice with whatever scanning ship they own, bookmark the locations, then bring their mining ship to clear the roids there. This does add a few minutes to thier normal routine, but keeps it as the passive event they seem to enjoy doing. Macro bots will require someone to scan down and bookmark the very many gravimetric sites in order to add these bookmarks daily to their macro mining bots resulting in more legitimate miners having access to rocks.
BIG CHANGE PART 2.5: Im sure many people will say a macro artist will just scan down, bookmark, and transfer bookmarks to his macro bots early in the day after downtime and do the same thing hes always been doing. This can be stopped by having intervals (either at fixed or variable times) where the other gravimetric sites will spawn in their random locations. ---- Reason: I thought it was pretty clear that now macro miners will have to check in on their bots throughout the day and updating their macro fleets with bookmarks for new sites to continue mining. Players (of all time zones) will find good pockets of roids to mine out without worrying about macros eating them up (or eating the good rocks).
BIG CHANGE PART 3: Overview roid belts will have much more veldspar and much less more profitable roids in them. Noobie miners will be happy with their veldspar profit for the first few days before finding out how to scan. Macro miners will now only be affecting the tritanium markets with vigor and will be affecting the other mineral's markets much less.
A few things will benefit from this: 1. Miners dont need to actively play mini games and keep their mostly passive methods of mining. 2. Macro miners will have a much more difficult time and will find their illegal method of mining is much more involved now and for people who just use the free macros that use mouse click memory will no longer have working or viable bots. 3. Exploration career agents will actually be used. 4. Macro miners will flood the market with less material thus spawning an increase to their profits from the small amounts (comparative to macro miners amounts) of material they do sell on a daily basis.
Continued on next post: [≡v≡] |
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.03 20:28:00 -
[2]
5. Scanning down grav sites for a human is not very difficult and will not take a miner much time to Bookmark a few sites to hit up during the time they usually spend mining meaning the time spent spent scanning will not cut into their mining times much especially considering the materials they do mine will be worth much more.
The real issue is that there is no real way to combat botting. But ways to make botting MUCH less effective without fundamentally changing the entirety of the situation the bots are meant to profit off of is the key to bringing balance back to miners.
I do not like mining and find it very boring - and I enjoy the cheap prices of my ships made by macro miners who flood the market with materials for people to produce the ships I eventually get blown up - but I think that even because of my reasoning for why I dont care about macro miners the people who are being affected by an illegal method should have a voice as well. [≡v≡] |
Reaver Glitterstim
Legio Geminatus
|
Posted - 2011.04.03 21:07:00 -
[3]
I think you have a really good idea to halt macro miners in their tracks. It would have to be implemented with care, however, maybe even in multiple "steps", in which the regular belts were thinned a bit and the grav sites increased a bit. The reason I say this is because the economy at current is used to getting its minerals mostly from bot miners. Making the change all at once, I fear, would be TOO successful, and ship prices would skyrocket until people got used to mining more.
Also, the ship mineral costs are based on the current influx of minerals, and might need to be reduced a bit; though I would leave that up to CCP to decide. --
Thousand Papercuts Project |
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 00:41:00 -
[4]
Im not sure what the current sec to ore is but I can agree with what you put. And as for the gradual change - I didn't even think of mineral price crash of such an immediate action so that would be a good idea. If your a miner you would be better at gauging my idea and thinking of a practice course of action.
My biggest concern with making this idea was, like you agreed, that newbs wouldnt know how to scan - and possibly scanning for ores would be a huge turn off for them as learning how to scan can be aneurysm inducing in the beginning. I think the industrial career track should definitely be revamped to discuss and explain the ore sec to ore type ratio as well to help get newbs out of 1.0 .
For your sec breakdown your still inferring that certain ores should be in certain regions right? [≡v≡] |
Im Super Gay
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 03:46:00 -
[5]
I've always liked the approach of moving all asteroid belts to grav belts. Ofc the bots will probably congregate to ice fields then...
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 04:31:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Im Super Gay I've always liked the approach of moving all asteroid belts to grav belts. Ofc the bots will probably congregate to ice fields then...
Very true. Im not gonna touch the subject of the perma producing ice fields though ... not with a ten foot pole. [≡v≡] |
Alghara
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 05:23:00 -
[7]
It's possible to use also Agents, with mission of mining. The gravi site it's also a very good idea.
And why not to change at every downtime the place of the "static belt" a little. The bookmark can be used for 24h only, it's more difficult for bots no ?
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 05:39:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Tyme Xandr on 04/04/2011 05:43:12 Even changing the overview accessible asteroid belts will still allow a macro bot to just warp to zero on asteroid belt and switch to an asteroid tab on the overview and mine whatevers closest. Not sure how to circumvent that. With the asteroid belts available via oveview having so little in terms of ore I think that will be enough to put a damper on macro miners ability to flood the market with ore, especially the 'higher grade' high sec ones.
I always thought with the advent of WHs more cruisers (osprey for example) would be hanging out in WHs spamming dscan for those ABC ores. The fact is I spose miners prefer the relatively easy and safe low end ores in high sec to fit their passive playstyle.
Itd be nice if solar systems werent so static like they were anyhow. But thats another topic all together.
------------
I had a discussion with a friend of mine who used to be a pretty dedicated and determined miner and his main protest was that scanning down grav sites would turn off a lot of people from mining. I fail to see his reasoning for it as it should only take a few moments with a scanning ship (like the one u get for free from the career agent) would make mining challenging especially when miners will gain large increases to profit.
Do any miners here agree with that? Would having to scan down a few belts prior to mining make your day too difficult? Would you stop mining due to a need for scanning these sites down? [≡v≡] |
Bo Tosh
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 07:57:00 -
[9]
Has possibilities
|
Th3bl4ckr4bbit
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 11:44:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Th3bl4ckr4bbit on 04/04/2011 11:45:03 Well mining in anoms protect you from gankers who can easiliy sacn you in belt...
-1 !!!
And even bots can mine in anoms too so no interest.
There is a simple easy way to eradicate all bots :
No more local.
|
|
Ooda
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 11:45:00 -
[11]
Scan something down only to get some roids sounds rly.. nah, it doesn't sound like mining. Passive playstyle. Log in, dock off, fly to a belt and eat some friggin rocks. That's what mining is about, watch Tv, do the dishes etc. pp. Mining is great cause u have to pay no attention. (in Highsec)
U should keep that in mind.
The only real way to fix this is to scan the RAM for background programs. Don't know why CCP is not using this. (theres this B- MMORPG using this technique too)
|
Anitta Blake
BSC LEGION Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 14:28:00 -
[12]
CPP could fix the bots problem in one day if it wanted to
1 run a DB query on a accounts that are online for 20h to 23 hours day 7 days a week
2 filter out all but them that do nothing but rat and mine 23x7
3 you have your ban list
|
Jaik7
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 15:33:00 -
[13]
did you move here from F+D (Fail and Die?)
good self motivation! i wish all the people who's ideas went well in F+D would repost here.
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 15:53:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Th3bl4ckr4bbit Edited by: Th3bl4ckr4bbit on 04/04/2011 11:45:03 Well mining in anoms protect you from gankers who can easiliy sacn you in belt...
-1 !!!
And even bots can mine in anoms too so no interest.
There is a simple easy way to eradicate all bots :
No more local.
Im pretty sure you didnt read my posts then because I explained how anoms combat the way bots work. [≡v≡] |
Corina's Bodyguard
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 16:17:00 -
[15]
While I like your idea (it isn't the stupid captcha one), it won't stop bots (it would for a few days while they get rewritten though).
The current scanning bot reportedly takes 12 minutes to scan down a high sec grav site. Not long enough that a small group of miners could clear the belt.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 16:33:00 -
[16]
bots can run l4s you idiot nothing you've posted here is more complex than a l4
|
Eve Orwell
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 16:44:00 -
[17]
i cant help but feel that getting rid of the macro miners will have a horrible fallout when mineral prices suddenly skyrocket due to a huge decrease in supply
this may not end up being the case, but we shall see
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 17:26:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Tyme Xandr on 04/04/2011 17:27:50 Theres a courier mission bot, but I have not seen any Level 4 combat related bots. Theres also bots that rat, but everyone ive heard of seems to have trouble looting the proper items.
The only bots I see (which are easy to make if you just download a free customizable Mouse Click Memory program) are mining bots. The other bots are paid programs and their forums are filled with 'Doesnt work' threads.
As for the scanning bot ... WHAT? What bot are you talking about? I cant even find information about one of these. Do you know how advanced something would have to be to recognize all the displayed information to make a scanning bot? Please cite your information.
Originally by: Eve Orwell i cant help but feel that getting rid of the macro miners will have a horrible fallout when mineral prices suddenly skyrocket due to a huge decrease in supply
this may not end up being the case, but we shall see
And it probably will. I can definitely see ships/modules prices getting MUCH higher as less material is made available on the market. CCP i think would enjoy this as they have been talking about their monetary systems insane inflation as more and more isk is produced. [≡v≡] |
Corina's Bodyguard
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 18:42:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Corina''s Bodyguard on 04/04/2011 18:42:32
Quote: As for the scanning bot ... WHAT? What bot are you talking about? I cant even find information about one of these. Do you know how advanced something would have to be to recognize all the displayed information to make a scanning bot? Please cite your information.
Not gonna cite it. Would rather not be banned.
Theres also the wonderful market bots, which are quite aggravating.
|
Jaik7
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 19:33:00 -
[20]
corina, those who make outrageous claims and then refuse to cite their sources fall under a certian category: troll. cite sources or that is what everyone will think.
|
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 20:28:00 -
[21]
This isnt a topic about market bots. This is about Mining Bots. After much scouring I couldnt find any details about any EVE Online scanning bot, so unless you have some proof about this then your just trying to discredit my idea and hope people will jump on the bandwagon. [≡v≡] |
Corina's Bodyguard
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 20:59:00 -
[22]
Unfortunately, any form of proof that I could post (links to sites selling them, or using one myself and recording it) would likely breach the EULA and give me a ban.
Unless CCP comes into this thread and says otherwise, I'm not going to risk it.
Now I like your ideas. I really do. But overall and over time, it will have little effect on the macro miners (compared to CCP's current efforts, which seem to be working slowly). Yes, it would stop the click bots (at least for a while), but not the ones that use direct client interfacing.
|
Corina's Bodyguard
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 21:11:00 -
[23]
And correcting what I should have done from the get go.
Support moving most roids to grav sites.
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.04 21:58:00 -
[24]
Ones that interface with the client can be discovered. The memory click bots cant be discovered as it uses a computer function that is necessary to how we all play the game (we click things).
The reason this idea shines above others because it doesnt change gameplay much. It uses methods already inscribed in the game: --- The current click an sit mining method that miners do not want to change. --- Scanning for grav sites, which is already in the game, however grav sites are low in quantity in most systems, this change increases the amount of them and contents of them.
Theres no need for invasive monitoring on CCPs side (which they would have to have a team of people monitoring and investigating) and theres no need for 'Captchas' or whatever they are called which is bothersome for the EVE Community as a whole and takes away from RP elements in the game.
The only reason I would ever remotely agree to the use of captchas is to minimize system sitting cloakers, but since that is such a trivial issue as it is I still wouldnt give my backing to it.
This is the quickest and most viable solution to the issue. Even if it minimizes macroing to 75% of current Bot miners who use the free memory Click programs it would be a huge advantage to current miners. [≡v≡] |
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2011.04.05 07:34:00 -
[25]
This idea is also being discussed in the thread [Proposal] Mining Makeover. -- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.04.05 10:40:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Tyme Xandr on 05/04/2011 10:44:57 My problem with that thread is it proposes to change too much. "Strip miners with falloff bonus/penalty. Scordite with bistot cores. Denser ore=slower mining."
While those ideas might be good for changing mining into something more interesting and 'fun'? My idea is to make mining more profitable for non macro miners while keeping everything else the same.
I did read towards the end a similar idea was brought forward. Hoping mine is clear and concise and doesnt represent a large overhaul of anything. [≡v≡] |
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2011.04.05 13:32:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Unfortunately, any form of proof that I could post (links to sites selling them, or using one myself and recording it) would likely breach the EULA and give me a ban.
You'd fit in with CSM just fine! "Discussed heaps of stuff about [NDA]."
-- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Ki'Lynn Onata
|
Posted - 2011.05.21 18:24:00 -
[28]
yes, he would. This is actually a pretty good idea and would make mining more intuitive.
|
Voddick
|
Posted - 2011.05.22 00:42:00 -
[29]
More grav sites and smaller existing belts are the best solution I've heard in a long time.
Now if only we can put an end to the endless ice fields...or just let the macro's congregate there and let hulkageddon take care of them.
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.05.22 03:59:00 -
[30]
Well this sure got dug up. Do any of the CSM care to say anything about this being a viable discussion with CCP?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |