EVE Search - Dynamic Ore Yield - Buff Mining and Nerf Botting

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Dynamic Ore Yield - Buff Mining and Nerf Botting

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 169	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:05:00 - [1] - Quote I ran a ~50 man lowsec mining corporation for around half a year. This is what I found out: Mining in lowsec is bad. You earn 30% more in lowsec with the same ship and boost. Looks good on paper, but you can't mine with a Mackinaw or Hulk in lowsec like you can in highsec. A Procurer with Rorqual boost in lowsec will earn 16% more than an Orca boosted Hulk in highsec. Also looks good on paper, but you have to have to dock up at the first sign of PVP and replace your losses if you fail that, which quickly eats away the 16%. There's also ISK/effort. In highsec the bad ISK/h is balanced out with amazing ISK/effort from AFK mining. In lowsec, AFK mining means certain death. Not only can you not AFK mine, pretty much any other activity has both better ISK/h and safety! So how do you make lowsec mining viable? Make ore yield dynamic and based on ore mined in a system. More people mining in a system will decrease ore yield and vice versa. In <0.5 this would make risk/reward dynamic and encourage people to mine in dangerous system like Amamake instead of botting/semi-AFK mining in a dead-end system. In highsec it would encourage people to spread out away from Jita (Solitude, anyone?) It would also make a lot of new or dead professions like prospecting and pirating possible and boost current professions like mercenaries. Wouldn't it be cool if you could make a serious (player) mining corporation that found a system with crazy yield and got so stupidly rich you could hire the local (player) pirate groups for protection? With dynamic yield, you could.
Sugar Kyle Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 594	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:21:00 - [2] - Quote Dynamic ore yield would be great. I've written about a system where ships such as the prospect can pull small batches of compressed ore. I firmly believe that static mining is not going to gain any type of traction with low sec but some type of hunter miner idea would give the opportunistic a chance. I believe that mobility is the key to making mining not boring and making mining viable in low sec. Low Sec Lifestyle - A Blog
Systemlord Rah All Inclusive SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:23:00 - [3] - Quote and what about medium to large sized mining corps they could manage alone to drop the yield i meant lets face it with 6-8 miners + boost 6-10 belts are nothing ok ok only if you have lots of free time without pvp
Arronicus X-Prot Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere 984	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:34:00 - [4] - Quote Systemlord Rah wrote: and what about medium to large sized mining corps they could manage alone to drop the yield i meant lets face it with 6-8 miners + boost 6-10 belts are nothing ok ok only if you have lots of free time without pvp I'm slightly confused here. Are you saying that 6-8 miners + boost is a medium to large sized mining corporation? I have 10 perfect hulk miners, and I am by no means a rarity in eve. As for something to change up lowsec, to make it more worthwhile in, yes, I think that would be nice, but simply making it so that the first few miners every day or whatever the cycle could make an absurd amount in a short period of time, then do other activities waiting for the dynamic yield bonus to regenerate? I just don't think that's the right solution, even if admittedly, a big step in the right direction.
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 169	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:35:00 - [5] - Quote Systemlord Rah wrote: and what about medium to large sized mining corps they could manage alone to drop the yield i meant lets face it with 6-8 miners + boost 6-10 belts are nothing ok ok only if you have lots of free time without pvp If they're big enough to deplete their home system and the neighboring systems they can either split up or move around. The Rorqual is great for this and I think CCP should make it even better at it when they fix it (jump bridge for industrials?).
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 169	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:50:00 - [6] - Quote Arronicus wrote: Systemlord Rah wrote: and what about medium to large sized mining corps they could manage alone to drop the yield i meant lets face it with 6-8 miners + boost 6-10 belts are nothing ok ok only if you have lots of free time without pvp I'm slightly confused here. Are you saying that 6-8 miners + boost is a medium to large sized mining corporation? I have 10 perfect hulk miners, and I am by no means a rarity in eve. As for something to change up lowsec, to make it more worthwhile in, yes, I think that would be nice, but simply making it so that the first few miners every day or whatever the cycle could make an absurd amount in a short period of time, then do other activities waiting for the dynamic yield bonus to regenerate? I just don't think that's the right solution, even if admittedly, a big step in the right direction. That is also a problem now with the first people after downtime getting the best ores and should be fixed whenever CCP disconnects ore respawn from downtime. The dynamic yield should be long term and take months to grow and months to deplete unless nuked by a big mining alliance. Systems should have ore yield multiplier that is increased by a non-linear number decided by the smart people at CCP every time ore respawns and decreased with a linear number for each unit of ore mined.
w3ak3stl1nk Hedion University Amarr Empire 33	Posted - 2014.05.22 00:48:00 - [7] - Quote Ice fields should be low sec only. Not null and not high. And it should really be random per regions so you actually need to find it. This should boost profit margin but still be semi random and hard to camp. This is just an alternative to dynamic yield ... Pulling people from high and null to visit low sec.
Sabriz Adoudel Mission BLITZ 2928	Posted - 2014.05.22 01:18:00 - [8] - Quote I think by far the best way to add dynamic yield would be to increase the +5% and +10% asteroids dramatically (to perhaps +60% and +150%) and make them quite rare. In addition, decouple their respawning from daily downtime. The first miner into a system in a while will get a few 250% asteroids to munch and then some 160%. The second miner can either bring a combat ship first and compete for the 250% roids, or just settle for some of the 160% ones. But if a big fleet comes in, they have to mostly settle for 100% ones. EVE rule 1: Never undock anything you can't afford to lose. Rule 2: Never trust anyone in-game unless you are sleeping with them IRL. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos
Velicitia Arma Artificer 2247	Posted - 2014.05.22 10:59:00 - [9] - Quote Sabriz Adoudel wrote: I think by far the best way to add dynamic yield would be to increase the +5% and +10% asteroids dramatically (to perhaps +60% and +150%) and make them quite rare. In addition, decouple their respawning from daily downtime. The first miner into a system in a while will get a few 250% asteroids to munch and then some 160%. The second miner can either bring a combat ship first and compete for the 250% roids, or just settle for some of the 160% ones. But if a big fleet comes in, they have to mostly settle for 100% ones. This is kinda nice ... thing is, even if you can "only" get the "vanilla" ores, some bastard botter (or uber multi-boxer) will still be able to outmine a small-medium group of actual players because the players might not all want to mine for 6 hours ... and want to get paid ... splitting ore from a belt or two 5 ways means you're getting pretty low income. Furthermore, there's no real carrot to getting out of a NPC corp. The new refining changes help, but maybe they don't go far enough? One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Abrazzar Vardaugas Family 3497	Posted - 2014.05.22 11:10:00 - [10] - Quote If you make mining dynamic, extend that to other mechanics, too. Dynamic missions, dynamic ratting, dynamic exploration. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 170	Posted - 2014.05.22 13:36:00 - [11] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: I think by far the best way to add dynamic yield would be to increase the +5% and +10% asteroids dramatically (to perhaps +60% and +150%) and make them quite rare. In addition, decouple their respawning from daily downtime. The first miner into a system in a while will get a few 250% asteroids to munch and then some 160%. The second miner can either bring a combat ship first and compete for the 250% roids, or just settle for some of the 160% ones. But if a big fleet comes in, they have to mostly settle for 100% ones. This is kinda nice ... thing is, even if you can "only" get the "vanilla" ores, some bastard botter (or uber multi-boxer) will still be able to outmine a small-medium group of actual players because the players might not all want to mine for 6 hours ... and want to get paid ... splitting ore from a belt or two 5 ways means you're getting pretty low income. Furthermore, there's no real carrot to getting out of a NPC corp. The new refining changes help, but maybe they don't go far enough? That's the whole point of my idea. Bots will always perform better than players in a risk-free environment like highsec or that dead-end pocket, but good luck running a botting fleet in Amamake! Abrazzar wrote: If you make mining dynamic, extend that to other mechanics, too. Dynamic missions, dynamic ratting, dynamic exploration. I totally agree! It's only logical that an agents will increase their reward if ignored and that NPC pirate groups grow bigger and stronger with higher bounties if left alone. I didn't include those because mining is in the biggest need of a buff like this and should be prioritized.
Velicitia Arma Artificer 2248	Posted - 2014.05.22 13:51:00 - [12] - Quote Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote: Velicitia wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: I think by far the best way to add dynamic yield would be to increase the +5% and +10% asteroids dramatically (to perhaps +60% and +150%) and make them quite rare. In addition, decouple their respawning from daily downtime. The first miner into a system in a while will get a few 250% asteroids to munch and then some 160%. The second miner can either bring a combat ship first and compete for the 250% roids, or just settle for some of the 160% ones. But if a big fleet comes in, they have to mostly settle for 100% ones. This is kinda nice ... thing is, even if you can "only" get the "vanilla" ores, some bastard botter (or uber multi-boxer) will still be able to outmine a small-medium group of actual players because the players might not all want to mine for 6 hours ... and want to get paid ... splitting ore from a belt or two 5 ways means you're getting pretty low income. Furthermore, there's no real carrot to getting out of a NPC corp. The new refining changes help, but maybe they don't go far enough? That's the whole point of my idea. Bots will always perform better than players in a risk-free environment like highsec or that dead-end pocket, but good luck running a botting fleet in Amamake! Fix here could be to nerf the (NPC Station) refining into the ground -- to the point where max skills and the implant WILL NOT result in "100% yield" anymore. I mean, it doesn't fix them just selling the ores ... but if they are refining, the only way to get "max refine" is with a POS. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
w3ak3stl1nk Hedion University Amarr Empire 33	Posted - 2014.05.22 14:43:00 - [13] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote: Velicitia wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: I think by far the best way to add dynamic yield would be to increase the +5% and +10% asteroids dramatically (to perhaps +60% and +150%) and make them quite rare. In addition, decouple their respawning from daily downtime. The first miner into a system in a while will get a few 250% asteroids to munch and then some 160%. The second miner can either bring a combat ship first and compete for the 250% roids, or just settle for some of the 160% ones. But if a big fleet comes in, they have to mostly settle for 100% ones. This is kinda nice ... thing is, even if you can "only" get the "vanilla" ores, some bastard botter (or uber multi-boxer) will still be able to outmine a small-medium group of actual players because the players might not all want to mine for 6 hours ... and want to get paid ... splitting ore from a belt or two 5 ways means you're getting pretty low income. Furthermore, there's no real carrot to getting out of a NPC corp. The new refining changes help, but maybe they don't go far enough? That's the whole point of my idea. Bots will always perform better than players in a risk-free environment like highsec or that dead-end pocket, but good luck running a botting fleet in Amamake! Fix here could be to nerf the (NPC Station) refining into the ground -- to the point where max skills and the implant WILL NOT result in "100% yield" anymore. I mean, it doesn't fix them just selling the ores ... but if they are refining, the only way to get "max refine" is with a POS. Maybe they should nerf POS so miners in null need to go to low also. Comparing just to high does not include the bots in deep null areas.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 1575	Posted - 2014.05.22 15:08:00 - [14] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Fix here could be to nerf the (NPC Station) refining into the ground -- to the point where max skills and the implant WILL NOT result in "100% yield" anymore. I mean, it doesn't fix them just selling the ores ... but if they are refining, the only way to get "max refine" is with a POS. this is whats happening. with max skills and a 4% implant u yield 72.4% which is the equivalent to todays 100% yield in mineral volume per batch. The problem with first come first serve belts is timezones. Europe gets much better quality of rocks than US -> AUS does atm. If super rocks are going to be a thing they need to spawn over time. and, do we need 5% and 10%? i ask because putting out a WTB ore order to ur corpies requires u to cover all types of ore in all thier variants and having to balance the ratios in which they a re found...would make my life easier EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Gori Thane Takahashi Syndicate Takahashi Alliance 4	Posted - 2014.05.29 01:38:00 - [15] - Quote Dynamic ore yield sounds like an answer that would fit very well with Eve's Isk=Risk model! I'm all for making mining more rewarding in lowsec and null since it's so much more risky. +1
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1353	Posted - 2014.05.29 04:51:00 - [16] - Quote Why would an asteroid suddenly get less ore simply because another miner started mining in the same belt, or even a different belt? This is just a nerf to any group mining.
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 175	Posted - 2014.05.29 15:36:00 - [17] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Why would an asteroid suddenly get less ore simply because another miner started mining in the same belt, or even a different belt? This is just a nerf to any group mining. It would take weeks or months to deplete belts unless you nuke it with a massive mining fleet.
w3ak3stl1nk Hedion University Amarr Empire 50	Posted - 2014.05.29 15:46:00 - [18] - Quote Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Why would an asteroid suddenly get less ore simply because another miner started mining in the same belt, or even a different belt? This is just a nerf to any group mining. It would take weeks or months to deplete belts unless you nuke it with a massive mining fleet. So this is to encourage solo gameplay?
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 175	Posted - 2014.05.29 16:37:00 - [19] - Quote w3ak3stl1nk wrote: Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Why would an asteroid suddenly get less ore simply because another miner started mining in the same belt, or even a different belt? This is just a nerf to any group mining. It would take weeks or months to deplete belts unless you nuke it with a massive mining fleet. So this is to encourage solo gameplay? No it would encourage people to move around instead of sitting in next to Jita or in a dead-end pocket far away from everything. The ore yield change should be non-linear, so most systems would keep around the same yield as now, but systems next to Jita would have slightly less and Amamake would have much more.
Abrazzar Vardaugas Family 3623	Posted - 2014.05.29 16:43:00 - [20] - Quote Shouldn't be a yield modifier but a asteroid spawn modifier. Easier on the database and more logical. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics
Dave Sidious Pawnstars INC The Obsidian Front 3	Posted - 2014.05.29 19:58:00 - [21] - Quote Here's an idea that occurred to me today. Raise the base value of all ore generally for those that deserve it. How? Quite simple really, change the mining mechanic to include a skill based, randomly generated mini game of some sort. The yield you get from the cycle will delend on the score you get in the game + skills ofc. AFKers and bots would be wiped out overnight due to the unpredictable nature of the game and not playing or failing gets you 0 ore. Ore and mineral prices would rise making active miners richer. Ship prices would rise which may reduce Supercap usage as the cost of replacement (and real man hours involved) would be significant enough to warrent caution. It might also make mining slightly more interesting than, target rock, activate lasors, go walk the dog. I'm not expecting all the AFKers to love the idea but I definitely think it has merit. If it would essentially collapse the entire game economy due to its reliance on AFK and bots then maybe its not so good. I'd like a Devs opinion though. Dave.
Tikktokk Tokkzikk S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass 175	Posted - 2014.05.29 21:03:00 - [22] - Quote Dave Sidious wrote: Here's an idea that occurred to me today. Raise the base value of all ore generally for those that deserve it. How? Quite simple really, change the mining mechanic to include a skill based, randomly generated mini game of some sort. The yield you get from the cycle will delend on the score you get in the game + skills ofc. AFKers and bots would be wiped out overnight due to the unpredictable nature of the game and not playing or failing gets you 0 ore. Ore and mineral prices would rise making active miners richer. Ship prices would rise which may reduce Supercap usage as the cost of replacement (and real man hours involved) would be significant enough to warrent caution. It might also make mining slightly more interesting than, target rock, activate lasors, go walk the dog. I'm not expecting all the AFKers to love the idea but I definitely think it has merit. If it would essentially collapse the entire game economy due to its reliance on AFK and bots then maybe its not so good. I'd like a Devs opinion though. Dave. I personally have no problem with AFK mining. My problem is the lack of propper risk/reward and convenience/reward. You have no reason to go more than a few jumps from your closest tradehub or leave your deadend pocket at all. I want to see mining operations in Amamake, with pirates trying to kill them and mercenaries/whatever trying to defend them.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Hello-There 514	Posted - 2014.05.29 22:01:00 - [23] - Quote Dave Sidious wrote: It might also make mining slightly more interesting than, target rock, activate lasors, go walk the dog. Dave. Doing that will either lose you your ship or leave it sat in space doing nothing once the asteroids go pop ( the natural control for AFK mining). AFK is risk/reward in action as the afk player risk their ship for the reward of easy but very slow isk. I wouldn't want to see mini games introduced to mining as they would become mind numbing so quickly. However I wouldn't mind the addition of some kind of improved active mining (the various comet mining/asteroid chasing ideas that have been put forward) alongside the existing mining mechanism. That way those with time spare can go and chase better yields without impacting the existing mining community other than depressing the isk/hour of the passive mining a bit.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,04s, ref 20250922/1215
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.