Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 00:21:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Rykuss A decrease in yields? I wouldn't say I'm necessarily against it but I'd need a good reason for it. Please explain.
There are fscktons of minerals flowing into the market, and that is the reason mining is unprofitable. Without drone compounds, some of that is alleviated; without the constant influx from bots, regardless of type, the flow is reducedà
àbut that still leaves the actual miners. If there was less for them to mine, what they did mine would become more valuable (but only if that reduced flow cannot be compensated for by throwing more manbothours at the problem or by going for other sources, such as loot and compounds).
Yes, there's also a call for making mining different, but that's not really an addition. Also, a surprising amount of actual miners seem to like the semi-afk, laid-back level of activity that mining offers, so simply changing it might not be up everyone's alley. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Mars Theran
Caldari EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 00:42:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Mars Theran on 14/06/2011 00:43:58
Originally by: Digital Messiah
Originally by: Rykuss
Originally by: Tippia The problem is that when people think "additions to mining" they generally envision stuff that increases you mining yield.
There are three things that would be good for miners, and neither of them are that ù indeed, none of them are even additions: the removal of drone compounds, a surprising and sudden removal of bots, and a drastic decrease in mining yields.
When people ask for improvement, they usually mean changing it into something moronic like PI. The stupid amount of minerals that come from melting crap mission loot and drone compounds aren't helping. The bots, well obviously but that's not going to happen quickly. A decrease in yields? I wouldn't say I'm necessarily against it but I'd need a good reason for it. Please explain.
There needs to be added waste factor when refining anything but ore. And I'm not talking skill based. I mean a decent 25% off the top no matter what. I was reading in other threads that some people were buying items, refining them, and making back profit in a decent margin doing so. It should be very hard to do this... Or perhaps their information was wrong. But all in the same they had solid numbers on the refined values of said items. And the sheer amount that gets on the market from mission loot is silly.
I suppose CCP could refund the sp of all miners and make it world of mission loot craft. Seeing how they could care less about mining and hardly ever mention it.
It's called Scrap Metal Reprocessing trained to 5 and 8 or higher standings with the station you refine at. Sound simple enough? /sarcasm. don't mind me.
As for that up up there, I might comment that reducing mining yield would increase build times on all ships. It's not how much gets to market you have to worry about; it's how long it takes to mine for a single manufacture.
|
Rykuss
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 00:58:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Rykuss A decrease in yields? I wouldn't say I'm necessarily against it but I'd need a good reason for it. Please explain.
There are fscktons of minerals flowing into the market, and that is the reason mining is unprofitable. Without drone compounds, some of that is alleviated; without the constant influx from bots, regardless of type, the flow is reducedà
àbut that still leaves the actual miners. If there was less for them to mine, what they did mine would become more valuable (but only if that reduced flow cannot be compensated for by throwing more manbothours at the problem or by going for other sources, such as loot and compounds).
Yes, there's also a call for making mining different, but that's not really an addition. Also, a surprising amount of actual miners seem to like the semi-afk, laid-back level of activity that mining offers, so simply changing it might not be up everyone's alley.
Thanks for clarifying, Tippia. While I agree on most of these points, in my experience, most "afk miners" are anything but miners. That guy/gal that plops an industrial in the belt and runs to the bank or mcdonald's is what I call an afk miner. These seem to be the people screaming for higher yields which I disagree with. You get out of it what you put in and it can be as afk as you'd like. Then there are those who mine for a bit when they don't have the time or don't feel like doing other things, I'd wager these people have slightly more SP's invested but aren't full time miners either. Again, probably scream for higher yields. These are probably the same people that want mining to be anything but mining.
If the other conditions were met, I could probably support a mining yield decrease. However, someone that mines full-time should still get the higher yields they've invested towards with their isk for hardwires, modules and time invested in training the necessary skills. So if the skills I've already trained net me a percent or two less per level as opposed to "afk indy miner" with mining level I invested, I suppose I could live with that. Most of the problems voiced by full-time miners I know was that they wanted the botting issue taken seriously.
|
Constantinus Maximus
Paxian Expeditionary Force
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 02:51:00 -
[34]
Originally by: kongking wang
im the past year or 2 there has not been a single addition to mining. nothing..
They made roids respawn daily instead of twice a week.
Due to noobs complaining that all the roids had been mined by "macros" in their Caldari mission hub system.
|
Digital Messiah
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:29:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Constantinus Maximus
Originally by: kongking wang
im the past year or 2 there has not been a single addition to mining. nothing..
They made roids respawn daily instead of twice a week.
Due to noobs complaining that all the roids had been mined by "macros" in their Caldari mission hub system.
Hmm, I wonder if someone from CCP would be so kind as to give a statistic on how many belts are actually getting mined out?
Quote: Don't Panic
|
Cpt Fina
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 04:17:00 -
[36]
I don't disagree with a general yield decrease but a decrease in the yield of mining equipment ceteris paribus will lead to a wealth reallocation from miners to other ppl who provide minerals.
This issue is also tighly connected to the abundance of supercapitals, or mudflaition as ppl like to call it on eve-o.
Maybe we should aim at a general decrease of mineral yeild across the board of all professions but a relative increase in the mineral take for miners, apart from making mining more interesting.
|
Bryson Bennington
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:22:00 -
[37]
Quote: It would be nice if they could make mining interesting, but that'll never happen. As it is, even the mere prospect of mining (no pun intended) makes me want to slit my wrists.
One way to make mining interesting is if while mining and after a random amount of ore mined an Asteroid Mission Agent would warp into the asteroid belt that you were in and offer you a mission the mission would be centered around the process of mining but could be any of the regular mission types offered. The asteroid mining agent missions would yield higher ISK and LP that you could then use towards the purchase of a ORE ship from the Sister's of EvE loyalty point store. Some of these types of mission's would be located in high sector space other's in null space and even some located in the DED Complexes. Depending upon the type of mission level that is ran the pilot might even receive a faction mining module or BPC drop.
Who knows even such mission's might even spawn a new type of mining barge called the Combat Barge that is specifically designed to complete such missions where other barges cannot. With Hulkageddon and all and the ability of suicide gankers killing off the mining barges something has to be done to give the miner's some teeth. Otherwise a much needed market in the game will be lost that would then be replaced by large gangs of PvP'er's killing each other off just so minerals to make ships can be refined from the modules in the wreck.
The biggest jerk off's in the game are the PvPer's who want to turn EvE Online into a first person shooter type arcade game for the simple reason they lack the patient's....and intelligence to do anything other than put a quarter into the machine and press Jump and Fire while moving the joystick in various direction's.
Being a miner, refining and creating products in the game will give you an understanding of how the real world process of society actually works.
|
Digital Messiah
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:53:00 -
[38]
I like the idea of changing mining missions. Preferably it would be nice to see mining missions that require you to fill up the cargo hold of a large freighter or secure container and warp back to station. You get a cut of the minerals you mined plus isk and LP. Like previously stated mining needs an LP buff hardcore. And like I had said not that long ago in another thread. They can $#17 out an alliance tournament ship, but can't give 2 seconds of their time to improve the very back bone that started this game. Yes I'm talking about mining btw. If people remember when the game was first starting out. Industry was required or you couldn't get what you wanted.
Quote: Don't Panic
|
Digital Messiah
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:57:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Digital Messiah on 14/06/2011 05:57:37 it double posted
Quote: Don't Panic
|
Eyup Mi'duck
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 06:18:00 -
[40]
I like mining as it is. Not everything in EVE should be full-on engagement... I use mining to make a few isk whilst refreshing my PI or reviewing the markets. Solo Hulk-mining and team mining ops are very different though - get four or more ships on a mining op and it becomes altogether more engaging, and an effective way of making isk.
One change I would like to see is to make the Rorqual available in hi-sec. The Orca just isn't up to the job when you get a serious mining op going.
Get over it! Learn from your mistake and move on. |
|
Ioci
Gallente Space Mermaids
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 07:32:00 -
[41]
Mining missions got a 400% LP buff. The ISK in Mining missions is still a joke but the fake Ore/Ice/Gas is what kills it. For general mining, with the surplus minerals in EVE right now they wouldn't be smart to make it more appealing.
Add LP stores unique to the mission lines so people will mine fake ore to buy mission LP store stuff. other than that, I don't know what they can do. |
Digital Messiah
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 09:27:00 -
[42]
Increasing the cost in minerals it takes to make certain items or all in general would help? The few possible reasons for such a high inflation. 1. items are being made faster than can be bought. 2. minerals are not being used fast enough. 3. A larger portion of consumers is self sufficient for minerals. 4. bots are over importing ore/minerals. 5. the yield at which can be mined does not correlate with the waste / requirement to manufacture.
This is something CCP should be looking into. So long as they foresee an increase in the total player population. So will it increase the amount of miners and mission loot. Honestly I think the best solution is to simply increase the manufacturing cost of an item by a factor of how many are in existence. This would encourage the industry community to focus on making a larger variety and discourage FOTM from getting to out of hand. Of course this balancing act already works but not in the same way as you see with the market inflating and deflating the values.
There are many pros and cons with any change that can and should be introduced. I just hope that the community and CCP will look for a compromise. I generally see about 48,000 users online max on a weekend. Can you imagine how bad this problem would escalate with 150,000 players? That is of course following the logic that miners would be trained at the same rate as today. Which is hypothetical at best.
Quote: Don't Panic
|
moskowitz
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 09:49:00 -
[43]
the future of mining...like everything else in eve will be somewhere raveled in the MT store.
OPEN for speculation!!
|
Sarah Steelringer
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 09:52:00 -
[44]
WHAT?
Shooting at rocks is not exciting enough? Dayummm...
All those skill points wasted
|
Scarlet des Loupes
Gallente University of Caille
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 09:56:00 -
[45]
Originally by: kongking wang FFS..
im the past year or 2 there has not been a single addition to mining. nothing.. i mean come on whats the point in the bloody thing if ur not gonna add anything new or fix any of the huge problems with it. are u just trying to **** people off enough in order for it to just die so u dont have to do anything with it.
You're getting pretty new turrets next expansion! ;)
|
Sandrestal
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:36:00 -
[46]
Well there were certain missions like Rogue Slave Trader, that had omber to mine and thus was a change of pace to the normal high sec belts. CCP, in it's infinite wisdom, decided after 5 years (that I played) to remove the omber. So the idea of have a occasional interesting scenario where you could mine something of slightly higher value in high sec. and thus make mining more interesting, seems to be beyond the comprehension of CCP. OTOH, CCP had no problems creating the drone region where botters could flock and seine in by the gabillions, minerals that destroyed the worth of the mining profession. Replace the drones with regular faction npc's and maybe mining would once again be a profession worthy of pursuit.
|
Savage Angel
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:00:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Rykuss A decrease in yields? I wouldn't say I'm necessarily against it but I'd need a good reason for it. Please explain.
There are fscktons of minerals flowing into the market, and that is the reason mining is unprofitable. Without drone compounds, some of that is alleviated; without the constant influx from bots, regardless of type, the flow is reducedà
àbut that still leaves the actual miners. If there was less for them to mine, what they did mine would become more valuable (but only if that reduced flow cannot be compensated for by throwing more manbothours at the problem or by going for other sources, such as loot and compounds).
Yes, there's also a call for making mining different, but that's not really an addition. Also, a surprising amount of actual miners seem to like the semi-afk, laid-back level of activity that mining offers, so simply changing it might not be up everyone's alley.
Decreasing yield across the board does not make mining more lucrative. You will get more ISK per m3, but mine less m3 per hour.
The way to make minerals more lucrative for a time is to increase the amount needed in industry. That increases the demand, which makes the price go up without reducing the speed at which you can mine. Therefore miners make more ISK.
Of course if you up it too much, more miners will appear and the supply will go up. It's economics. So there is only so much that can be done.
You can also eliminate the competition by lowering drone yields and hammering the botters, but again if the prices go up, so will the number of miners in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |