Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
7656
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 14:59:37 -
[1] - Quote
A set of new Upwell Structures is in the works: Behold the Upwell Refineries!
Refineries will be the premiere structure for resource collection and processing. They have bonuses to reprocessing and the exclusive ability to fit moon mining and reaction service modules.This will give us completely new gameplay for moon mining and reactions, as well as linking into future resource collection gameplay.
Check out the exciting details in this blog Introducing Upwell Refineries
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14795
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:07:13 -
[2] - Quote
Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
236
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:11:59 -
[3] - Quote
Drill Baby Drill!
'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3163
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:15:17 -
[4] - Quote
I'm too scared to read it. Plz tell me everything is gonna be ok. PLEASE TELL ME ITS OK. |
Elizabeth Norn
Nornir Research Nornir Empire
1038
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:15:36 -
[5] - Quote
RIP siphons.
Quote:the new reactions system will not have hard limits on the number of jobs per structure, and will have per-character limits that can be increased with a new skill.
What about an index?
Free 3rd party services
21 day trial, you keep the whole PLEX
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
7656
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:17:11 -
[6] - Quote
Rowells wrote:I'm too scared to read it. Plz tell me everything is gonna be ok. PLEASE TELL ME ITS OK.
Just pointing out ...
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2740
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:17:13 -
[7] - Quote
I'm glad to see CCP going ahead with the oft-requested change to moon mining to active harvest, and to changing reactions to a RAM activity. This should help everyone, considerably.
Question: Will reactions have their own cost index, like current RAM activities do? I'm assuming so, but it wasn't explicitly stated.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2740
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:18:39 -
[8] - Quote
Oh, another question: will the current significant bonus for sovereignty for reactions/moon mining be preserved?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
194
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:22:29 -
[9] - Quote
So since Moon mining will change..... Can you tell us what will happen to mobile siphon units? can we use these on refining facilities? |
xttz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
804
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:23:51 -
[10] - Quote
Are we in a position to start talking details about a starbase hardware amnesty yet? We already have piles of worthless CSAAs and similar mods, and refineries will virtually finish off existing starbase functionality.
Time to start recycling it. |
|
Fonac
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
119
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:26:03 -
[11] - Quote
Question: What kind of ships will be able to mine the new type of ore? And is rorquals included in this, or does it require a whole new set of drones? |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2741
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:28:11 -
[12] - Quote
xttz wrote:Are we in a position to start talking details about a starbase hardware amnesty yet? We already have piles of worthless CSAAs and similar mods, and refineries will virtually finish off existing starbase functionality.
Time to start recycling it.
I wouldn't expect it yet. They still have to replace cynojammers, beacons, and jump bridges.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
51
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:28:35 -
[13] - Quote
Do you understand the impact this will have on lowsec?
Most of the larger lowsec alliance rely on passive moon income and have less isk making opportunities on an alliance level than nullsec allainces which was outlined on some reddit posts made during the leaks and an article on crossing zebra,
No one in lowsec is gonna mine so rip lowsec???? |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2741
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:30:18 -
[14] - Quote
Okay, third question. I'm needy.
Do you have any estimate on the cost of these things? I'm mostly looking for an answer like "cheaper than a citadel, but more expensive than an engineering complex of the same size" or "cheaper than an EC of the same size." Exact numbers are obviously meaningless this far out.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Trixi Laminer
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:32:07 -
[15] - Quote
Whats the estimated prices for BPO's for the refineries and their specialized modules? And do you have any estimated reciepe for materials and components needed to build the refineries? Will you be able to build one in highsec and get better refining than in current EC's? |
JTK Fotheringham
Ducks in Outer Space
134
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:32:49 -
[16] - Quote
Woohoo |
Jadek Kin
Incorruptibles
87
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:36:33 -
[17] - Quote
Is there a possibility for moons to be destroyed by heavy fracking? Shattered Moons?
@JadekMenaheim
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3163
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:36:35 -
[18] - Quote
Last time I saw moon fracking like this there were tons of xenonorphs and it was generally bad week for everyone involved. |
Bear Templar
Reality Dysfunction Inc. The Five
16
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:37:23 -
[19] - Quote
Querns wrote:Okay, third question. I'm needy.
Do you have any estimate on the cost of these things? I'm mostly looking for an answer like "cheaper than a citadel, but more expensive than an engineering complex of the same size" or "cheaper than an EC of the same size." Exact numbers are obviously meaningless this far out.
From the blog they said: "Refineries will come in medium and large sizes with prices between that of Engineering Complexes and Citadels."
If a fish weighs 1 Kilogram plus half its own weight, how much does it weigh? (It's not 1.5kg btw)
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2741
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:38:06 -
[20] - Quote
Bear Templar wrote:Querns wrote:Okay, third question. I'm needy.
Do you have any estimate on the cost of these things? I'm mostly looking for an answer like "cheaper than a citadel, but more expensive than an engineering complex of the same size" or "cheaper than an EC of the same size." Exact numbers are obviously meaningless this far out.
From the blog they said: " Refineries will come in medium and large sizes with prices between that of Engineering Complexes and Citadels."
Yeah, see my edit; I found it. Derp.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:40:09 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling
literally yeah
Question though, the devblog states: "However only Refineries deployed near minable moons will be able to fit a moon drill service module."
Is that just a general statement, or can we expect differences between moons in regards to minable, not minable - cause that's a little interesting.
One more question: how will the active gameplay be approached in terms of skills and shiptypes? Any current thoughts or concepts? |
Thead Enco
Thunderwaffe Goonswarm Federation
289
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:42:02 -
[22] - Quote
Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Do you understand the impact this will have on lowsec?
Most of the larger lowsec alliance rely on passive moon income and have less isk making opportunities on an alliance level than nullsec allainces which was outlined on some reddit posts made during the leaks and an article on crossing zebra,
No one in lowsec is gonna mine so rip lowsec????
Yea, AFKSec is still a go since those same people will still be waiting for their super spawns. |
Brown Pathfinder
Its a good day to die
18
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:43:40 -
[23] - Quote
Will we able to scoop up moon crust in wh space? Maybe in limited numbers?
Also will we able to say put this down in a ore or ice anom to generate more ore to mine? also can you please not make them difficult to transport like you did with the other L sized structures. |
naed21
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
41
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:43:42 -
[24] - Quote
If not moon minerals, can wh space get something else? Normal asteriods, ice, PI asteriods? (Large chunk of Micro Organisms) |
Klatus Doshu
Interstellar Expeditionary Corps
7
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:44:06 -
[25] - Quote
What will be the restrictions for wormholes? Are there any ideas around? Right now you cannot produce T2 materials there by moon mining... will this change? But I like the new concept very much |
Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
51
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:44:48 -
[26] - Quote
Brown Pathfinder wrote:Will we able to scoop up moon crust in wh space? Maybe in limited numbers? Also will we able to say put this down in a ore or ice anom to generate more ore to mine? also can you please not make them difficult to transport like you did with the other L sized structures. They said they dont have plans to exapnd to high or wh space in the dev blog^^ |
Bill Lane
Strategic Insanity FUBAR.
105
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:45:37 -
[27] - Quote
RIP pure PVP alliances who rely on some passive income. This change literally makes a mining division a requirement for every alliance.
On the plus side, refining. Cool.
Oh and literally these will be priced in the range of citadels/ECs? So all of the POSes from 145 mill for the small tower moon miners to the billion isk large towers, you're telling me EVERY small tower will need to be replaced by something that costs more than a billion isk. Straight up screwing the small guys, and straight up screwing alliances with no mining groups aren't we CCP? For the record my alliance CAN afford it and DOES have a large mining division, so we're not too worried.
What does concern me is how I, as the alliance CEO, will need to start taxing the hell out of everyone to make sure the alliance is making money. We didn't charge corp fees, paid good money for ore buyback, all that. This was by FAR the main income for us so I could pay SRP, give people good money for ores/salvage, etc. And we really aren't putting very much in the alliance wallet. We're not broke, but we're not rich by far.
Honestly taxing the hell out of everybody sounds like a terrible idea. Guess corp fees are being forced on us now, along with awesome taxes. Come on now, this is really the best we could come up with?
Military Gamers gaming community
FUBAR's Website
|
ArmyOfMe
Hull Breach. Reverberation Project
629
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:52:05 -
[28] - Quote
Why would you not make moon minerals depletable and make those money moons respawn at random regions/systems rather then this. It would make for much more conent as not only would ppl have to scan down moons, but fights would occur much more often then what they do now. Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks. Im also expecting this to be a lot harder to kill then most moon mining pos's in low sec which usually consists of a small undefended pos these days to be able to make a profit (yes i know, there are other moons then r64s)
GM Guard > I must ask you not to use the petition option like this again but i personally would finish the chicken sandwich first so it won´t go to waste. The spaghetti will keep and you can use it the next time you get hungry. Best regards.
|
SonofSilence
Appetite 4 Destruction Appetite 4 Destruction.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:52:07 -
[29] - Quote
CCP and EVE Dev group...
Would you quit gaying up EVE please?
Thanks... |
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike Circle-Of-Two
57
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:53:20 -
[30] - Quote
This clearly opens up for completely new gameplay. And EVE just got a tad bit more complex (is that even possible!?)
First of all, staggering the "ore-field explosions" over a large sov-area, and planning this to allow for your "mining-armada" to cope with all the resource-gathering, will be potentially enormous! If there is also a certain" within bounds" behaviour, where you can not control the exact times with fine granularity, this will be extremely interesting to see how it evolves, when you are to collect R64-capbale new "ore" when several R64 ore-fields explode at the same time in several dispersed places in a region! How fun! How terrible!
Also, potentials for attacking said mining-fleets is interesting! You can potentially deprive an alliance of both income AND mining-fleets if performed correctly. And, AFAIK, it will be possible to tell roughly when a R64 ore-field will "explode". And cloaky alts...and spies...and access to corporation APIs....
One thought; Ore-fields will "explode" in vicinity of a Refinery citdadel, so that mining fleets can be "covered" by the Refinery weapons. So they will spawn completely within the weapon envelops of the Refineries? Or will it be possible to sneak in ninja-mining ships in areas of the ore-fields that are NOT covered by the weapons? Would it be possible to place other citadels in such a way that you get dual/multiple coverage of the ore-fields?
Ex ex-CEO of Svea Rike [.S.R.]
|
|
Muon Farstrider
Partial Safety
43
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:53:21 -
[31] - Quote
I like a lot of this; changing moon mining into an active activity is, IMO, a positive. I do have a bit of a dislike for parts of the ledger feature, though.
Quote:Each Refinery structure with an active moon drill will keep track of all the mining done in its associated belt, logging the character, corporation, ore type and amount mined. This will allow ...corps and alliances to see who has been ninja-mining their fields without permission.
...we are also investigating opening up the option of tracking entire solar systems worth of mining...
I don't think I like these ideas, at least as presented. IMO you shouldn't be able to gather that sort of information in an automated fashion, at least not for hostiles. If you leave your valuable moon mining operation (that you know exactly when is going to spawn) so unattended that literally nobody is there to see someone swooping in to ninja-mine your goo, then you don't deserve to automagically know exactly who it was. This is the same sort of thing that made siphons worthless.
IMO, it should work something like this. The ledger records character/corp/type/amount on a short delay for alliance members only. When the field is fully mined out and/or despawns, the ledger then reports "this field should have contained X amount of material A, but only Y amount was mined by alliance members, someone ninja-mined X-Y of this material" but does not tell you who or when.
This way you do still know that someone was ninja-mining you, but you don't get automated warning of it until it's already happened and you don't know who. It gives you enough information to warn you that someone is stealing and to guesstimate the scale of the ninja-mining, but if you want to know who to retaliate against you'll actually have to pay attention and follow up with human observation.
This all goes double for full-fledged system-wide mining tracking. Getting full details on enemy activity in an automated fashion over a whole system is silly. Again, some sort of warning isn't inappropriate, but getting full details should require human attention.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Initiative
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:54:38 -
[32] - Quote
Bill Lane wrote:RIP pure PVP alliances who rely on some passive income. This change literally makes a mining division a requirement for every alliance.
On the plus side, refining. Cool.
Oh and literally these will be priced in the range of citadels/ECs? So all of the POSes from 145 mill for the small tower moon miners to the billion isk large towers, you're telling me EVERY small tower will need to be replaced by something that costs more than a billion isk. Straight up screwing the small guys, and straight up screwing alliances with no mining groups aren't we CCP? For the record my alliance CAN afford it and DOES have a large mining division, so we're not too worried.
What does concern me is how I, as the alliance CEO, will need to start taxing the hell out of everyone to make sure the alliance is making money. We didn't charge corp fees, paid good money for ore buyback, all that. This was by FAR the main income for us so I could pay SRP, give people good money for ores/salvage, etc. And we really aren't putting very much in the alliance wallet. We're not broke, but we're not rich by far.
Honestly taxing the hell out of everybody sounds like a terrible idea. Guess corp fees are being forced on us now, along with awesome taxes. Come on now, this is really the best we could come up with?
Invest in pets, err, I mean support networks. Specialised groups - either through relations, subversion, force, whichever works sustainably. I will admit though, it raises the bar, also financially. Perhaps more importantly, it increases organisational complexity.
On the plus side, teamwork also benefits from EVE's economics of scale. It is something to think about.
As for taxes, this is EVE. It's about death and taxes |
Bear Templar
Reality Dysfunction Inc. The Five
16
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:55:16 -
[33] - Quote
Yeah it was strange, the edit wasn't there as i was typing my reply but was as I posted it.
If a fish weighs 1 Kilogram plus half its own weight, how much does it weigh? (It's not 1.5kg btw)
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Initiative
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:56:57 -
[34] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Why would you not make moon minerals depletable and make those money moons respawn at random regions/systems rather then this. It would make for much more conent as not only would ppl have to scan down moons, but fights would occur much more often then what they do now. Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks. Im also expecting this to be a lot harder to kill then most moon mining pos's in low sec which usually consists of a small undefended pos these days to be able to make a profit (yes i know, there are other moons then r64s)
Because then null blocks would find themselves subject to stimuli for migration and conflict. You know all this. We've been through this before plenty times in the past.
It's a lobby mechanism that ups the treshold to even consider such an approach - perception problems basically.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2741
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:57:28 -
[35] - Quote
Bear Templar wrote:Yeah it was strange, the edit wasn't there as i was typing my reply but was as I posted it.
Yeah, and it missed my addition at the bottom, even though I did the strikethrough and added the extra bit in the same edit. Strange.
Thanks for the effort, though! Always happy to be corrected when I'm objectively wrong.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
542
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:58:11 -
[36] - Quote
so you decide to allow multiple structures on the same moon, the owner decides when to set the pull, if the owner isn't there once the pull arrives, it then breaks off for anyone in the area to pull from...
oh boy... the fights on the r64's and the like.. my god
you guys have really lost your minds msh |
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike Circle-Of-Two
57
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:01:11 -
[37] - Quote
Henry Plantgenet wrote:So since Moon mining will change..... Can you tell us what will happen to mobile siphon units? can we use these on refining facilities?
This! Siphons?
Ex ex-CEO of Svea Rike [.S.R.]
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Initiative
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:01:17 -
[38] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:so you decide to allow multiple structures on the same moon, the owner decides when to set the pull, if the owner isn't there once the pull arrives, it then breaks off for anyone in the area to pull from...
oh boy... the fights on the r64's and the like.. my god
you guys have really lost your minds msh
Nah, seriously small chance for that happening. At least in null. Lowsec is a little different. Keep in mind regional and organisational control, automation, tracking tools and so forth - this would not be a conflict catalyst in null. I can see people trying to sell it as such, but let's be real, we've seen this concept before in the past. With blocks, it doesn't fly.
Now if deposits depleted ..... that would be a different ballgame. |
Malcolm Erkkinen
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:02:59 -
[39] - Quote
So another nail in the coffin of small miners / manufacturers? Surely this means players will need to join a large Corp or get into another line of business.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2741
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:03:46 -
[40] - Quote
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:Henry Plantgenet wrote:So since Moon mining will change..... Can you tell us what will happen to mobile siphon units? can we use these on refining facilities? This! Siphons?
You can siphon by going to someone else's belt and ninjamining it. You'll even get a lot more profit from it than the utterly pitiful amount you get from siphons currently.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Bear Templar
Reality Dysfunction Inc. The Five
16
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:04:02 -
[41] - Quote
Querns wrote:Bear Templar wrote:Yeah it was strange, the edit wasn't there as i was typing my reply but was as I posted it. Yeah, and it missed my addition at the bottom, even though I did the strikethrough and added the extra bit in the same edit. Strange. Thanks for the effort, though! Always happy to be corrected when I'm objectively wrong.
It wasn't there when i was typing, only after I'd posted. I then edited and removed your last line.
But anyway, glad you found what you were looking for.
If a fish weighs 1 Kilogram plus half its own weight, how much does it weigh? (It's not 1.5kg btw)
|
Bear Templar
Reality Dysfunction Inc. The Five
16
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:07:11 -
[42] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote: ... Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks. ...
Isn't this a good thing though? I'm not a low-sec industrialist myself but i get a feeling from the forums that low-sec (in general) could do with a boost.
If a fish weighs 1 Kilogram plus half its own weight, how much does it weigh? (It's not 1.5kg btw)
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere Coalition of the Unfortunate
1828
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:13:31 -
[43] - Quote
If this comes out without a way to set alliance level ratting taxes i'm going to throw a shitfit. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2742
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:14:09 -
[44] - Quote
Okay, fourth question. Hope I'm not detracting from all of the Chicken Little stuff going on ITT.
Regarding:
Quote: Once the chunk of moon rock has completed its journey into space, the Refinery can use its drill module to detonate the chunk into a minable asteroid field. The exact time of the detonation is controlled by the owners of the Refinery within limits. If the chunk is left unattended long enough it will disintegrate into the asteroid field on its own.
Will the detonation require a player to initiate it, or can it be scheduled?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Igzorn Buelle
7
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:14:21 -
[45] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:A set of new Upwell Structures is in the works: Behold the Upwell Refineries! Refineries will be the premiere structure for resource collection and processing. They have bonuses to reprocessing and the exclusive ability to fit moon mining and reaction service modules.This will give us completely new gameplay for moon mining and reactions, as well as linking into future resource collection gameplay. Check out the exciting details in this blog Introducing Upwell Refineries
Great to hear but waht does it bring for Highsec exept some boni on reprocessing? i mean its clear that moonmining will be more of a "low" and "wh" thing ,but why should i build one.. lets say in a 0.5 system when it does not bring a "new" element to gameplay. were's the sales pitch? |
Angry Arnst
W.O.R.M-S.W.A.R.M SPEC OP Privateers
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:14:39 -
[46] - Quote
This all fine and dandy but as found with cits it cost in my opinion more keep running then tower ever did and for a lot less isk.
Be nice if CCP make a chart showing every cit platform and mods used for them and costs per mod fuel wise as a guide also |
Gaius Clabbacus
Basket of Deplorables
40
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:15:30 -
[47] - Quote
Ordering massive amounts of popcorn right now. This is going to be a blast. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:20:13 -
[48] - Quote
Bear Templar wrote:ArmyOfMe wrote: ... Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks. ...
Isn't this a good thing though? I'm not a low-sec industrialist myself but i get a feeling from the forums that low-sec (in general) could do with a boost.
Double-edged sword. Yes, good for activity indexes. Are the effects on experience of gameplay reflected by that? Depends a lot on whether you are a larger organisation, or a small groups. Complexity goes up, dependancies are introduced, the ballgame changes. But specialisation has its limits, and so do dependancies, as such people always follow established herd behaviour.
We'll have to see how CCP flesh it out, but it feels very subject to n+1 min/max mentality. It's not like any argument in relation to changes based on similar concepts as here have had any tangible effect as intended for groupthink or group behaviour.
I'm not convinced on the socio-economics basically, based on what we currently know and on established track records. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
3408
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:24:10 -
[49] - Quote
Are Mobile Siphon Units going away?
Signatures should be used responsibly...
|
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
835
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:24:50 -
[50] - Quote
This is a bit of a wild idea, but it's a thought that would throw a bone to lowsec.
What if the quality of these moon belts were inversely proportional to the security status of the system compared to what we have now (where the lower the truesec, the better the asteroid belts, rats, moons, etc)? Higher truesec would have better moon belts, meaning that lowsec would be the go-to for harvesting moon minerals.
Nullsec moons would still provide these moon belts, but the size and quality of the rocks would be reduced as you get deeper into the truesec (meaning the best nullsec areas would generally be the ones nearest the borders, which are also the ones most likely to be easily targeted).
This would also make nullsec sov with poor truesec a better place to call home, in addition to throwing a bone to lowsec.
A lore-related bit behind this is that a part of the reason that highsec is highsec is because that's where the best resources / minerals are at (with the empires holding exclusive rights on the "good" ore there, and our scanners being prevented from even seeing it in the belts), and it's where the empires are most willing to defend (beyond simply having a manpower-related reason). From 0.5 through 1.0, the resources are good enough that the empires are willing to put forth a significant amount of effort to defend them. 0.1 through 0.4 are still empire, but aren't good enough for the empires to put effort into their own mining operations, thus opening it to Capsuleers.
Outside of wormholes (which can't do moon mining), nullsec already has the best asteroid belts, anoms, rats, gas, etc. Inverting the usual truesec impact on moon minerals might be something interesting.
For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
|
|
Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:26:04 -
[51] - Quote
So here are some thoughts i have from what i've read so far:
Active gameplay is all well and good, but i do think these should be released with drilling platforms. If you assume drilling platforms provide the ability to passively extract resources, you could set the gameplay for these to work in tandem with drilling structures, but they would have less yield than actively mining them. Snuff and a few others here have raised some very important points about how this hurts lowsec groups that rely on passive moon goo income. If you're going to force active gameplay, you're going to HAVE to fully open up w-space and hisec to moon mining with these structures if you don't want to see the t2 economy to violently crash and burn. I'd bet my left toe that MOST of the people (if not upwards of 90%) rely on moon mining to be passive, and would prefer to keep it that way to suppliment their most decidedly non-pve activities. Many of these people, especially non-fw lowsec groups, would sooner go to null or w-space than be forced to mine or do PVE activities to suppliment their income. The idea of any of them running mining operations in lowsec, let alone the meat grinder of FW space, is one of the grossest misunderstandings of player behavior since Incarna. It will NOT end well for anyone involved. [*] If this is going to come to pass as-advertised, then let me make a little suggestion: Add d-scan immunity to the porpoise and the skiff. Giving lowsec and nullsec mining operations some decent counterplay is going to be essential if you're putting the burden of AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE ECONOMY into active gameplay with a fat load of risk involved, where it was passive before. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of player behavior in regards to how the t2 economy works with moon goo. |
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
39
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:29:00 -
[52] - Quote
RIP alliance srp for small-medium size alliances (not like free ships did anything in the way of content anyways, right guys?) Also RIP t2 ships
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2743
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:30:23 -
[53] - Quote
Liira Savlin wrote:So here are some thoughts i have from what i've read so far:
Active gameplay is all well and good, but i do think these should be released with drilling platforms. If you assume drilling platforms provide the ability to passively extract resources, you could set the gameplay for these to work in tandem with drilling structures, but they would have less yield than actively mining them. Snuff and a few others here have raised some very important points about how this hurts lowsec groups that rely on passive moon goo income. If you're going to force active gameplay, you're going to HAVE to open up w-space and hisec to moon mining with these structures if you don't want to see the t2 economy to violently crash and burn. I'd bet my left toe that MOST of the people (if not upwards of 90%) rely on moon mining to be passive, and would prefer to keep it that way to suppliment their most decidedly non-pve activities. Many of these people, especially non-fw lowsec groups, would sooner go to null or w-space than be forced to mine or do PVE activities to suppliment their income. The idea of any of them running mining operations in lowsec, let alone the meat grinder of FW space, is one of the grossest misunderstandings of player behavior since Incarna. It will NOT end well for anyone involved. If this is going to come to pass as-advertised, then let me make a little suggestion: Add d-scan immunity to the porpoise and the skiff. Giving lowsec and nullsec mining operations some decent counterplay is going to be essential if you're putting the burden of AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE ECONOMY into active gameplay with a fat load of risk involved, where it was passive before. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of player behavior in regards to how the t2 economy works with moon goo. You may not have noticed, but disrupting the passive mining of moongoo and changing the way that part of the economy works is deliberate and intended. They're not going to try to preserve much, if anything of the status quo.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
72
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:31:08 -
[54] - Quote
Please for the love of god dont keep the current distribution of moon goo - there are areas of space that are so lacking and the weird distribution of certain elements is daft.
I'd suggest starting from scratch:
Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Not saying massive screw up the ballancing but say if a belt gives you 1,000,000 units of goo once refined you get:
Atmospheric Gases x 200,000 Evaporate Depositsx 200,000 Hydrocarbonsx 200,000 Silicatesx 200,000 Cobaltx 25,000 Scandiumx 25,000 Titaniumx 25,000 Tungstenx 25,000 Cadmiumx 15,000 Vandiumx 15,000 Platinumx 15,000 Chromiumx 15,000 Caesiumx 7,500 Technetiumx 7,500 Hafniumx 7,500 Mercuryx 7,500 Promethiumx 2,500 Dysprosiumx 2,500 Neodymiumx 2,500 Thuliumx 2,500
you can then play with individual moons so a current Dyspro moon could give 25,000 per belt.
its a rough idea I grant you but please dont leave goo like it is now
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
542
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:32:23 -
[55] - Quote
this will cause massive impact on t2 production, which will then make faction ships the meta (which they already are) so are you guys going to fix/rebalance t2 ships as a whole.. since its pretty obvious their price is about to go way up.
i cant believe you guys came up with this "dead space" like mini-game for mining.. its kinda cool, but then again.. really?? in eve?? so umm.. what happens when you have a cloaky camper now watching moon chunks going directly into a structure which he then can easily just call in his hot dropping boys to blow up.. just cause that moon just provded him free total intel???
will the sov holders receive any notification of the deployment of these structures as well as notifications its under attack?
you still haven't undated DED notifications properly when it comes to deployment of structures for SOV HOLDERS!..
c'mon fozzie.. did you write this down |
Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:33:06 -
[56] - Quote
Querns wrote:Liira Savlin wrote:So here are some thoughts i have from what i've read so far:
Active gameplay is all well and good, but i do think these should be released with drilling platforms. If you assume drilling platforms provide the ability to passively extract resources, you could set the gameplay for these to work in tandem with drilling structures, but they would have less yield than actively mining them. Snuff and a few others here have raised some very important points about how this hurts lowsec groups that rely on passive moon goo income. If you're going to force active gameplay, you're going to HAVE to open up w-space and hisec to moon mining with these structures if you don't want to see the t2 economy to violently crash and burn. I'd bet my left toe that MOST of the people (if not upwards of 90%) rely on moon mining to be passive, and would prefer to keep it that way to suppliment their most decidedly non-pve activities. Many of these people, especially non-fw lowsec groups, would sooner go to null or w-space than be forced to mine or do PVE activities to suppliment their income. The idea of any of them running mining operations in lowsec, let alone the meat grinder of FW space, is one of the grossest misunderstandings of player behavior since Incarna. It will NOT end well for anyone involved. If this is going to come to pass as-advertised, then let me make a little suggestion: Add d-scan immunity to the porpoise and the skiff. Giving lowsec and nullsec mining operations some decent counterplay is going to be essential if you're putting the burden of AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE ECONOMY into active gameplay with a fat load of risk involved, where it was passive before. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of player behavior in regards to how the t2 economy works with moon goo. You may not have noticed, but disrupting the passive mining of moongoo and changing the way that part of the economy works is deliberate and intended. They're not going to try to preserve much, if anything of the status quo. That's my point. The stability of moongoo up until now is what has helped make the t2 economy viable. If they do this without any support to passive moon mining or mining counterplay, the majority of the lowsec moon mining is going to get abandoned. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:33:28 -
[57] - Quote
Liira Savlin wrote:So here are some thoughts i have from what i've read so far:
Active gameplay is all well and good, but i do think these should be released with drilling platforms. If you assume drilling platforms provide the ability to passively extract resources, you could set the gameplay for these to work in tandem with drilling structures, but they would have less yield than actively mining them. Snuff and a few others here have raised some very important points about how this hurts lowsec groups that rely on passive moon goo income. Something to consider yes. None of that however offsets required organisational adaptation - things change in EVE, it's the only constant.
Liira Savlin wrote:
If you're going to force active gameplay, you're going to HAVE to open up w-space and hisec to moon mining with these structures if you don't want to see the t2 economy to violently crash and burn. I'd bet my left toe that MOST of the people (if not upwards of 90%) rely on moon mining to be passive, and would prefer to keep it that way to suppliment their most decidedly non-pve activities. Many of these people, especially non-fw lowsec groups, would sooner go to null or w-space than be forced to mine or do PVE activities to suppliment their income. The idea of any of them running mining operations in lowsec, let alone the meat grinder of FW space, is one of the grossest misunderstandings of player behavior since Incarna. It will NOT end well for anyone involved. Why? Things crashing and burning is not only good for gameplay, it's good for underlying economics - and there's never been any situation where such a thing had any tangible impact on player abilities. I remember cap recharger II's at 40m a pop with towers burning. And the show was still on the road. If anything, **** was more alive. If one can say such a strange thing about biological waste.
Liira Savlin wrote:
If this is going to come to pass as-advertised, then let me make a little suggestion: Add d-scan immunity to the porpoise and the skiff. Giving lowsec and nullsec mining operations some decent counterplay is going to be essential if you're putting the burden of AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE ECONOMY into active gameplay with a fat load of risk involved, where it was passive before. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of player behavior in regards to how the t2 economy works with moon goo. Our BPO's welcome that suggestion, but I'd kinda like to see the Noctis pick up a little love here. Small, specialised, room for younger characters, less n+1 counter paths, more room for small scale pew pew, etc.
Also, it's not "an entire section of the economy". It's just human behaviour. It can still be passive, just pay/seduce/let/make/force others to do it for you, if needs be. Economics of scale following group behaviour still applies. And specialisation remains king.
|
CupKate
Burning Skull Syndicate
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:33:53 -
[58] - Quote
tl/dr: 1) move moon belts further from the mining structure to increase risk to the miners of this valuable material 2) NO LOGGING by the structure. If you're getting robbed,you figure it out. Don't let the game do it for you. 3) Allow more than 1 structure per moon, spread out the drilling/belt material across all anchored drilling structures so that the total net is still the same. negotiate or blow the competition up if you want a monopoly on the moon. There shouldn't be an advantage for just being the first group to anchor a structure on the prime moons during the first few hours after the expansion.
personal opinion for the good of the game, I think there needs to be more risk, and less corporation/alliance tracking of who mines and what gets mined.
Explain #1) put the new moon ore field further from the structure, so the structure guns can't cover it. still close enough on grid to see, but the miners should be at some risk without a structure there to protect them. this is the most valuable material to mine, make it risky to do so.
Explain #2) don't introduce those logging tools, that sounds like someone's idea who wants to retain some control over what comes out of the moon. This is still too close to the existing protected moon mechanic. If a non-corp or enemy ninja miner want to run an op to steal your crap, get your crap organized and have eyes around your system to prevent it. Don't let the structure log what is going on around it and give you that intel for free with no effort. If you're getting robbed, figure it out yourself!
You're blasting huge chunks of moon material into space, what does the structure owner get control over what happens to it? Get further away from "Owning" a moon.
Explain #3) ALSO, let there be more than one moon drilling rig/structure per moon. With each additional structure the size of the mined belts becomes smaller,such that the net total material is the same but spread across all the mining structures. If you want a monopoly on your moon, blow the other guys up, or negotiate some terms. One structure per moon is too restrictive and too much like the current broken mechanic. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:35:38 -
[59] - Quote
Querns wrote:
You may not have noticed, but disrupting the passive mining of moongoo and changing the way that part of the economy works is deliberate and intended. They're not going to try to preserve much, if anything of the status quo.
Actually, that depends on where you focus on. Lowsec will see changes, null not so much. The only real thing to upset status quo would be depletion mechanisms. The intent is clearly visible yes, but it's not going to upset much. Never has thusfar. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2745
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:38:36 -
[60] - Quote
Liira Savlin wrote:That's my point. The stability of moongoo up until now is what has helped make the t2 economy viable. If they do this without any support to passive moon mining or mining counterplay, the majority of the lowsec moon mining is going to get abandoned.
The current alliances who rely on passive moongoo mining will have difficulty and need to adapt, yes. This is a good thing; all "iceberg" organizations should die, preferably while on fire and screaming.
We at Goonswarm Federation, noted dead lowsec alliance, have adapted. Why haven't you and yours?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Gisele Serebriakova
Norman's Meat Market
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:39:02 -
[61] - Quote
ermahgerd
ERMAHGERD!
Seems nice. No more auto-money for the lazies with supercaps.
Is there a delay between release of the facilities/BPO's and turning off POS goo mining/reactions to give people time to set up the new facilities? Otherwise t2 prices should blow up for a month or three with near zero production and refinery costs at peak. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:39:03 -
[62] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
I'm wondering about something, and this is a serious question ...
those "chunks" of rock, will I be able to bump them so they crash into other people, structures and planets?
(Yes, I remember splash damage) |
Raddan Eldre'Thalas
4 Marketeers Rura-Penthe
26
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:41:10 -
[63] - Quote
Quote:However, for this first release we are not currently planning on expanding moon mining to areas of space where it is not available today (highsec and wormholes). Although this gameplay has the potential to be interesting and fun in any area of space we want to be careful not to dilute the regional value of tech two resource collection too much.
Just throw us wormhole dwellers a bone already and give us moon mining! As my friend says Quote:literally no lore reason not to, just nullbears bitching that they want exclusive rights to it
If you so worried about diluting the value of T2 resources then just Quote:...determining how much or little we may need to adjust distribution of moon minerals . |
Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:42:06 -
[64] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote:Please for the love of god dont keep the current distribution of moon goo - there are areas of space that are so lacking and the weird distribution of certain elements is daft.
I'd suggest starting from scratch:
Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Not saying massive screw up the ballancing but say if a belt gives you 1,000,000 units of goo once refined you get:
Atmospheric Gases x 200,000 Evaporate Depositsx 200,000 Hydrocarbonsx 200,000 Silicatesx 200,000 Cobaltx 25,000 Scandiumx 25,000 Titaniumx 25,000 Tungstenx 25,000 Cadmiumx 15,000 Vandiumx 15,000 Platinumx 15,000 Chromiumx 15,000 Caesiumx 7,500 Technetiumx 7,500 Hafniumx 7,500 Mercuryx 7,500 Promethiumx 2,500 Dysprosiumx 2,500 Neodymiumx 2,500 Thuliumx 2,500
you can then play with individual moons so a current Dyspro moon could give 25,000 per belt.
its a rough idea I grant you but please dont leave goo like it is now
This is a really good compromise idea |
ArmyOfMe
Hull Breach. Reverberation Project
630
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:43:09 -
[65] - Quote
Bear Templar wrote:ArmyOfMe wrote: ... Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks. ...
Isn't this a good thing though? I'm not a low-sec industrialist myself but i get a feeling from the forums that low-sec (in general) could do with a boost. I doubt this in any way will work as a low sec boost. Sadly low sec is the most overlooked part of eve and hasnt had anything happen to it since faction warfare was introduced in 2008 (other then the sentry gun changes which I to this day still have no clue why they implemented)
GM Guard > I must ask you not to use the petition option like this again but i personally would finish the chicken sandwich first so it won´t go to waste. The spaghetti will keep and you can use it the next time you get hungry. Best regards.
|
Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:26 -
[66] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Liira Savlin wrote:So here are some thoughts i have from what i've read so far:
Active gameplay is all well and good, but i do think these should be released with drilling platforms. If you assume drilling platforms provide the ability to passively extract resources, you could set the gameplay for these to work in tandem with drilling structures, but they would have less yield than actively mining them. Snuff and a few others here have raised some very important points about how this hurts lowsec groups that rely on passive moon goo income. Something to consider yes. None of that however offsets required organisational adaptation - things change in EVE, it's the only constant. Liira Savlin wrote:
If you're going to force active gameplay, you're going to HAVE to open up w-space and hisec to moon mining with these structures if you don't want to see the t2 economy to violently crash and burn. I'd bet my left toe that MOST of the people (if not upwards of 90%) rely on moon mining to be passive, and would prefer to keep it that way to suppliment their most decidedly non-pve activities. Many of these people, especially non-fw lowsec groups, would sooner go to null or w-space than be forced to mine or do PVE activities to suppliment their income. The idea of any of them running mining operations in lowsec, let alone the meat grinder of FW space, is one of the grossest misunderstandings of player behavior since Incarna. It will NOT end well for anyone involved. Why? Things crashing and burning is not only good for gameplay, it's good for underlying economics - and there's never been any situation where such a thing had any tangible impact on player abilities. I remember cap recharger II's at 40m a pop with towers burning. And the show was still on the road. If anything, **** was more alive. If one can say such a strange thing about biological waste. Good counterpoints to my doomsaying, but you can't deny that goo suppy is going to be hit massively. There was a good post about balancing distribution of goo more widely that could be a good compromise to this, since it would also help out smaller groups. Liira Savlin wrote:
If this is going to come to pass as-advertised, then let me make a little suggestion: Add d-scan immunity to the porpoise and the skiff. Giving lowsec and nullsec mining operations some decent counterplay is going to be essential if you're putting the burden of AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE ECONOMY into active gameplay with a fat load of risk involved, where it was passive before. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of player behavior in regards to how the t2 economy works with moon goo. Our BPO's welcome that suggestion, but I'd kinda like to see the Noctis pick up a little love here. Small, specialised, room for younger characters, less n+1 counter paths, more room for small scale pew pew, etc. Also, it's not "an entire section of the economy". It's just human behaviour. It can still be passive, just pay/seduce/let/make/force others to do it for you, if needs be. Economics of scale following group behaviour still applies. And specialisation remains king.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2745
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:36 -
[67] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Maetel Lithium
Shinigami Miners
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:40 -
[68] - Quote
This process of creating a mineable field as detailed in this devblog is down-right exciting. I have always wanted more "active mining" and this actually achieves STRATEGIC game play, while keeping a well accepted tactical game play style. |
Nerriana
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:56 -
[69] - Quote
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:This clearly opens up for completely new gameplay. And EVE just got a tad bit more complex (is that even possible!?)
One thought; Ore-fields will "explode" in vicinity of a Refinery citdadel, so that mining fleets can be "covered" by the Refinery weapons. So they will spawn completely within the weapon envelops of the Refineries? Or will it be possible to sneak in ninja-mining ships in areas of the ore-fields that are NOT covered by the weapons? Would it be possible to place other citadels in such a way that you get dual/multiple coverage of the ore-fields?
An interesting gameplay choice would be that since only a refinery citadel can cover the ore-field, the refinery citadel weaponry would require an active gunner and not do anything on automatic. This would make ninja-mining possible (if there's nobody at the controls or the controller is AFK, the ninja-miners can mine without interference from the citadel) and still allow for active defense of friendly miners. |
Tetsel
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
307
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:47:12 -
[70] - Quote
CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
|
Drammie Askold
Saints Of Havoc Rate My Ticks
59
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:47:47 -
[71] - Quote
Making moon mining active and a group activity is an excellent idea. I think that CCP has hit the bullseye with these structures. Kudos to team Five O
What New Eden needed was Wise Immortal Philosopher Kings. What New Eden got was Sociopathic Immortal poo-flinging monkeys . . . vOv
|
Anna Lightyear
Red Storm Rising
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:50:34 -
[72] - Quote
With this move, what's the plan for the Siphons? |
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. The Bastion
180
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:51:00 -
[73] - Quote
There are so many grey areas and holes in this 'String' of updates it's hard to see were CCP are going with this update.
They talk about co-operation in Corps and Alliances while selectively forgetting that this type of behavior has never been something Eve players have ever engaged in willingly, even when forced to do so by CCP mechanics it has never ended in a progressive increase in this type of activity.
Again we see only a partial set of ideas released, some which have been pointed out in this thread already are areas that will do no good for the participants, small alliances and corporations will not be able to participate in this as they will not have the people available to put in the time required and as such will be shut out. Similar with Alpha's and CCP's, 'So far and no further' policy they to are shut out of this
Overall while I am sure CCP Devs have put a lot of time into this it looks over complicated even from the brief outline placed in the Blog, Hours or even weeks to realize any meaningful output and all indication to date are that some minerals will only be available through this means, again CCP arm twisting to participate which to date has never ended well for the players or the game.
While I agree that PoS structure mechanics badly needed an overhaul, all of this was for nothing after CCP homogenized the Eve universe taking out of the equation some of the largest content generators there have ever been in the game replacing them with bland featureless updates like the latest Sov iteration that have not brought back those heady days when players actually had some reason to fight for resources, every indication is that this new set up will cause some conflict, but not over resources but only the structures installed to gather them and we have already had a taste of that system.
Question I ask is how many of these structures can we as players eat at one time without getting thoroughly sick of the taste while even the one's we have are unfinished works in progress so full of bugs and lacking full utility as they are currently, again CCP Dev's box ticking at it's worst as predicted, nothing is getting finished before a new round of updates comes along driven by some schedule as yet unpublished by CCP.
Years past all the players ever really wanted from the Dev's was to fix the game, repair what was broken and make it work as advertised, instead they got even more 'New' stuff, broken from the outset leaving the players chasing from one update to the next but always feeling let down once again, This proposal looks to be yet another one of those.
Humanity is the thin veneer that remains after you remove the baffled chimp.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2746
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:15 -
[74] - Quote
Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx
Here's a relevant quote from Fozzie:
CCP Fozzie [23:52] more people have asked me about siphons in the last hour than have used siphons in the past week :slightly_smiling_face:
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
52
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:32 -
[75] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one?
NC is taking all of em in our area at least , so prolly not lol |
DarkCookie23
Slays Industrial Core
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:56 -
[76] - Quote
Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Do you understand the impact this will have on lowsec?
Most of the larger lowsec alliance rely on passive moon income and have less isk making opportunities on an alliance level than nullsec allainces which was outlined on some reddit posts made during the leaks and an article on crossing zebra,
No one in lowsec is gonna mine so rip lowsec????
as a low sec miner i look forward to these changes and hope my high sec mining brothers will join me in the ninja mining fun of this new system.
know if only there was a move active way of doing PI
Thank you CCP, I hope to hear more as this develops |
Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
53
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:58:50 -
[77] - Quote
DarkCookie23 wrote:[
as a low sec miner s
Stop trollin pls |
Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
53
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:00:16 -
[78] - Quote
Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. |
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:00:45 -
[79] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one?
Given it also requires me to either ninja mine from someone else's belt or to drop a refinery of my own i doubt I'll get much or ever get on top of Dyspro moon any time soon. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
4030
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:08:28 -
[80] - Quote
Once these are released, is the need for the POS gone? Will they get removed when refineries are released? Will there be some sort of grace period? What about POS stuff on the market, or in hangars?
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
|
Tetsel
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
307
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:08:42 -
[81] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx Here's a relevant quote from Fozzie: CCP Fozzie [23:52] more people have asked me about siphons in the last hour than have used siphons in the past week :slightly_smiling_face:
Nice job "Useless" CSM....
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
99
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:09:51 -
[82] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:RIP alliance srp for small-medium size alliances (not like free ships did anything in the way of content anyways, right guys?)
I'm curious how alliances even with only 4-5 systems that have 4-6 moons each are expected to mine all that , good luck getting a bunch of pvpers to get in a mining fleet.
Maybe reduce overall amount of moons but making per moon income much higher?
100x this, it's been the topic of our alliance Slack discussion since this dropped.
For those that find a way to make this work I really feel sorry for you. CCP is adding new game play requirements to the least engaging portion of the game -- mining. So now if I'm a miner I have to do the dullest portion of the game for personal income + mine for the alliance constantly. Even if I don't mine for personal income you're going to have alliances levying a mining requirement on their PVE/PVPers because the alliance has to have income to survive.
Nearly all small and many medium sized alliances will never be able to meet the demands this will place on them. With the loss of alliance level income comes the death of the alliance. No income means no SRP or Infrastructure. The alliances die and all that is left if a few mega alliances running the entire null-sec map.
I thought the entire point of tearing down the old SOV system was to break up the big alliances and allow the little guys a chance to thrive. This change throws all of that out the window. Bad call CCP, horrible job CSM!!! |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2748
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:11:06 -
[83] - Quote
Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy.
In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle.
However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2748
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:11:54 -
[84] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote:Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one? Given it also requires me to either ninja mine from someone else's belt or to drop a refinery of my own i doubt I'll get much or ever get on top of Dyspro moon any time soon.
Oh no, you may need to have infrastructure. Heaven forbid!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:11:58 -
[85] - Quote
Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx
Sucking is apparently not a bad thing. |
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:17:07 -
[86] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote:Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one? Given it also requires me to either ninja mine from someone else's belt or to drop a refinery of my own i doubt I'll get much or ever get on top of Dyspro moon any time soon. Oh no, you may need to have infrastructure. Heaven forbid!
Its not the need for infrastructure that is the issue, its defending it from large entities like Goons & PL etc that can dominate most other entities. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14795
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:18:44 -
[87] - Quote
Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback and questions so far! I'll be doing a larger Q&A response at a later time but for now one quick answer to a question that's coming up a lot:
We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:20:20 -
[88] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback and questions so far! I'll be doing a larger Q&A response at a later time but for now one quick answer to a question that's coming up a lot:
We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Wait, what? Sucking IS a bad thing? Dang
On the bright side, I can see the point. |
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:20:26 -
[89] - Quote
Querns wrote:Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle. However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed.
Im interested in what a goon has to say about this, how does a med/small alliance that doesn't have a full mining wing expected to mine several moons, enough to keep up with SRP and infrastructure/fuel cost?
Alliances like goons are gana benefit so much from this patch, you can hardly say "Even I, a goon, think this should happen"
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
Sassums
Repo Industries
137
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:20:28 -
[90] - Quote
So if I am reading this correctly you are continuing to cater to the null sec folks while WH people receive no love.
T3 was our only production option in WH space that didnt require us to leave the WH to produce - with gas reaction BPO's requiring Ice products we will now either have to go out to HS to purchase said ice or roll until we find a shattered that has ice belts (that will almost always guarantee a gank)
T3 Production should continue to be a W-Space product and should not require K-Space components.
If this is changing then W-Space should be allowed to harvest resources from the moons of the systems we inhabit.
If not - remove the stupid ice requirement from T3 reactions. |
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:22:15 -
[91] - Quote
Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? ---ditto x lots---
Thx
Will no longer need to exist (is how I read it) - replaced by ninja mining Prospects.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Jenn aSide
Absolute Massive Destruction Test Alliance Please Ignore
15383
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:23:35 -
[92] - Quote
I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this? |
Tetsel
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
307
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:23:56 -
[93] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback and questions so far! I'll be doing a larger Q&A response at a later time but for now one quick answer to a question that's coming up a lot:
We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Thanks for the answer, I'll stay polite, this time... but might bring some torch & pitchfork at Fanfest.
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:24:17 -
[94] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Once these are released, is the need for the POS gone? Will they get removed when refineries are released? Will there be some sort of grace period? What about POS stuff on the market, or in hangars?
Still have Jump Bridges and related things to change......
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Plaid Rabbit
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
33
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:25:24 -
[95] - Quote
Something I'd like to request is that CCP release the structure/service module BPOs ahead of time and allow them to be built, but not anchored/used. Then on release day, return the rigs, allow anchoring, and people can play with the "new" feature on the first day. |
Le Mittani
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:26:19 -
[96] - Quote
Hey look another change that will work well for nullsec with no thought at all for how it will affect low sec. But then again who cares about low sec. I'm sure the thrilling battle proc and skiff meta will be great for low sec. |
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:26:45 -
[97] - Quote
Could it be tweaked so a Large Citadel goes on a planet and have a rig/service to pull in one or two more chucks?
I dont mind dropping citadels but the spam is getting a bit over the top. |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
542
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:27:20 -
[98] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback and questions so far! I'll be doing a larger Q&A response at a later time but for now one quick answer to a question that's coming up a lot:
We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
so what you're saying is either...
mining barges can steal from the chunk.
or use a freaking titan to steal that r64 moon chunk...
(feints) |
Tetsel
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
307
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:29:12 -
[99] - Quote
Marcus Tedric wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Once these are released, is the need for the POS gone? Will they get removed when refineries are released? Will there be some sort of grace period? What about POS stuff on the market, or in hangars? Still have Jump Bridges and related things to change......
That's what the infamous "stargate" from that fanfest trailer is for.
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:29:21 -
[100] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this?
Yeah ur gana love this until you realize you will be mining weekly only for all ur moon roids to be going to the alliance, alliance is not gana let you keep the goo....
Alliance is not gana spend money on the fuel and refinery only to launch the roids into space and let the miners take what they can mine and go spend it on more crystals... alliance will need all the money it can get from the rocks to supplement srp and infrastructure costs. Even more so since it wont be able to mine nearly as many moons as they do now, so it will need every isk from the moon meaning you wont be getting a decent, if any, cut.
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18759
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:30:42 -
[101] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this?
Grr miners. |
DarkCookie23
Slays Industrial Core
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:31:08 -
[102] - Quote
Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:DarkCookie23 wrote:
as a low sec miner
Stop trollin pls
no trolling man need that low sec ice
https://zkillboard.com/kill/60831778/ |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
172
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:38:07 -
[103] - Quote
I see internal diplomatic incidents waiting to happen. Once mined, there's no way to force someone to pay you a fee. This literally is asking for drama, and not the good kind, but the players/corps being kicked from their alliances kind due to the actions of the few kind.
First, might I suggest causing the structure to put a "barrier" along the belt which when crossed will warn that a % fee based on the value will be deducted from the player's wallet (based on the owner's settings) at the end of every cycle. If they can't pay the fee the cycle fails and that's that. Allow this to be bypassed by a new form of the "siphon" units which allow entry undetected of the anchoring player. Entries show within the mining log as "unknown" but still have it log the stolen goods. These new deployables should be 1 shot deals which cannot be picked up and last for their duration maybe an hour, up to a day.
Last point, simply due to the number of moons in existence, and the unknown size of the belts created (I'd assume along the lines of what we see in a small belt anomaly, this could take a lot of time even if you stagger them. The task of mining the materials will be daunting. Perhaps consider allowing the structures to still passively mine the material over the 1-2 week cycle that it takes for the next rock to be hauled up. That way once the new rock is there, the previous one has been cleared.
This also allows for a constant amount of materials to continue to enter the market, but allows for players to speed up the process without actually effecting volume. |
Duncan McClain
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
13
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:38:33 -
[104] - Quote
Overall this is better than expected.
Also, just wanted to point out that Querns is on fire today.
|
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
99
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:38:34 -
[105] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this? Grr miners.
I think a major misconception is that most line members have no idea what it costs to keep all of the alliance services up and running. I-hubs, upgrades, jump bridges/cynogenys, towers, citadels, and the physical items that go with these (towers/structures, fuel blocks, SRP, etc) all cost isk.
I imagine at the big coalition level there's graft (every society has this problem) but at the small/medium alliance level it's a struggle to make it month to month, especially in a war where SRP demands skyrocket. |
Sophie Judd
Debyl Mining Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:40:16 -
[106] - Quote
with mining a moon i assume over time the moon its self will deplete and disappear ? or like all asteroid belts will it replenish its self each day or cycle of the refining ? |
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
1207
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:41:00 -
[107] - Quote
For the love of God and all the is holy -
PLEASE
Stop introducing more structures that require rigs using raw materials that are already too scares on the market to support!
Reduce the number of raw materials on rigs for these structures, there is no balance.
ALSO-
It's obvious that CCP - you - designed the Upwell structures to need rigs for max efficiency. In thinking that you wanted to provide "profitable" content to salvage players, you made the rigs require a "stupid" amount of raw materials. This thinking would lead to more salvage content to balance the market because of demand - profit follows the player. However, that has not happened and your flawed thinking has resulted in a severe deficit in raw materials. This proposed change follows the exact same flawed thinking - people who do not mine for content will not change their play style just because it becomes more profitable.
This one change can/may/might collapse the game market and lose players from being priced out of play style. It's not like there is an army of salvagers all of a sudden? Why would there be an army of miners to mine rocks and not tears? |
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
29809
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:43:11 -
[108] - Quote
Make these structures like a movable ships you can anchor and call them Mooncrackers.
Every part of a game helps to tell a story =ƒôò
Where is Angry CONCORD guy when you need him
Osprey =ƒÜÇ
GëíGïüGëí GÖÑ
|
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
835
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:43:35 -
[109] - Quote
This was mentioned over on Reddit (original comment here), but it's a good idea and I thought it was worth reposting in the official thread:
tcwillis79 wrote:Suggestion: Make it so that you can only detonate the moon rock during your vulnerability timer. This will cut down on the time zone tanking because people will need to set the vulnerability window when they can field a fleet.
For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
|
Sophie Judd
Debyl Mining Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:45:20 -
[110] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
"2nd question i have is what will happen to those who have bases on planets will the refining in future go onto these and if so will those with planet bases get a free upgrade :-) ? |
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2752
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:52:51 -
[111] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this? Yeah ur gana love this until you realize you will be mining weekly only for all ur moon roids to be going to the alliance, alliance is not gana let you keep the goo.... Alliance is not gana spend money on the fuel and refinery only to launch the roids into space and let the miners take what they can mine and go spend it on more crystals... alliance will need all the money it can get from the rocks to supplement srp and infrastructure costs. Even more so since it wont be able to mine nearly as many moons as they do now, so it will need every isk from the moon meaning you wont be getting a decent, if any, cut.
Maybe your alliance won't let you keep the goo from refineries.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
2683
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:53:06 -
[112] - Quote
1. I don't like the generic tied to sec status mechanic for moon minerals, enough other mechanics are tied to sec that it is nice to have some other conflict drivers. 2. Opening up moon mining to wormholes seems to make sense with the activity requirement. 3. will be interesting to see the numbers, a while back when ccp changed the numbers they created a tech bottleneck and allowed for a ton of market speculation.
Malcolm Erkkinen wrote:So another nail in the coffin of small miners / manufacturers? Surely this means players will need to join a large Corp or get into another line of business. how does this change small groups? as a soler it doesn't seem worth my time to try and setup a moon mining or reaction pos as there is no way for me to defend it, and I buy all the mats I need on the market. I don't really see any changes,
Querns wrote:Emmy Mnemonic wrote:Henry Plantgenet wrote:So since Moon mining will change..... Can you tell us what will happen to mobile siphon units? can we use these on refining facilities? This! Siphons? You can siphon by going to someone else's belt and ninjamining it. You'll even get a lot more profit from it than the utterly pitiful amount you get from siphons currently. not to mention the pvp opportunities that arise while they mine it. seems the move to an active system negates the whole concept of siphons.
selling officer BCUs! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6872141
@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
156
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:53:50 -
[113] - Quote
> We will be issuing appropriate compensation for owners of any rigs that have their build costs reduced.
Someone please check if CSM profiteers have manipulated this market and bought a massive amount of rigs 3 days ago as well. |
Takashi Halamoto
Gemini Talon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:54:58 -
[114] - Quote
questions
1) will rorquals be able to dock at the Large Refinery (as they cannot dock in azbels but can in fortizars)
2) will normal mining drones/Strip Miners/ mining lasers work on moon chunks or will we need 'moon harvesting 5 and a Moon Laser/drones'
3) will currently 'dead' 'resourceless' moons be given materials?
4) will current moon mineral distributions be reviewed and possibly changed regardless of 3) |
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1892
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:57:36 -
[115] - Quote
Exciting stuff. Maybe a few rough edges that I haven't caught on to yet, but the overall plans look very promising. I'm especially surprised at the amount of 'logging' features you're putting in from the start. Very nicely thought out and no doubt useful for the large empires who control the majority of the moons.
Couple of questions though:
1. Will Rorquals be able to mine moon fields? If so, will they get new types of Exhumers?
2. Will barges and exhumers receive new laser modules/crystals for these new ores?
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Algathas
Wraithguard. The Wraithguard.
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:58:58 -
[116] - Quote
This is exciting news. I am all for the new interactive moon mining. |
Jenn aSide
Absolute Massive Destruction Test Alliance Please Ignore
15387
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:00:09 -
[117] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this? Yeah ur gana love this until you realize you will be mining weekly only for all ur moon roids to be going to the alliance, alliance is not gana let you keep the goo.... Alliance is not gana spend money on the fuel and refinery only to launch the roids into space and let the miners take what they can mine and go spend it on more crystals... alliance will need all the money it can get from the rocks to supplement srp and infrastructure costs. Even more so since it wont be able to mine nearly as many moons as they do now, so it will need every isk from the moon meaning you wont be getting a decent, if any, cut.
I won't be mining at all lol. I'm a Ratter. But don't let that stop your whining. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2754
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:00:34 -
[118] - Quote
Duncan McClain wrote: Also, just wanted to point out that Querns is on fire today.
I try.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
542
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:02:29 -
[119] - Quote
Sophie Judd wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread. "2nd question i have is what will happen to those who have bases on planets will the refining in future go onto these and if so will those with planet bases get a free upgrade :-) ?
ccp not giving away free upgrades.. lady you crazy lol
its all buy-in.. just as before shall it be the future.. all pos's must go and folks must buy this new stuff.. as for reimbursement thats a huge subject which im sure fozzie will not dive into just yet ( due to fanfest coming up and it primarily being seagull's subject item i assume).
they must work out whats going to happen to outpost/stations and these POS's, and the jump bridge and stargates..lol
so much so little time.. grab some popcorn and prepare the threadnaught.. this is gonna get goooooood! |
Cngaar Aya
The Library Association Wormlife
9
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:03:28 -
[120] - Quote
I actually like the sound of a lot of this. Some notes on the moon mining in relation to wormholes:
- I actually agree with keeping moon goo out of wormholes. While it'd be nice, it'd also encourage the more powerful K-space groups to move into wormhole space.
- The ice requirement is hopefully modest, as ice is the single most annoying thing to replenish in wormhole space, since ice belts only appear in shattered systems.
- Recommend allowing moon mining on barren moons, including in wormholes, but it produces mineable ore and/or ice asteroids. Mining ops in wh space is treacherous, but this would go a long way to dealing with unpredictable ore anomalies.
|
|
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:03:44 -
[121] - Quote
Exciting ideas. Shakeup is good. Please think about how this will happen & effect lowsec for balance!
Idea: Only allow moon ore to be refined to moon minerals in a structure with a drill. This will allow the entity with the drill to tax the refine. Since these are event type minings make sure the expected rate of mining is at least 2x in value your ABC ore analogy. |
MidnightWyvern
Night Theifs Curatores Veritatis Alliance
362
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:11:55 -
[122] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Last time I saw moon fracking like this there were tons of xenonorphs and it was generally bad week for everyone involved. Make us whole again?
Rattati Senpai noticed us! See you in the next FPS!
Alts: Saray Wyvern, Mobius Wyvern (Dust 514)
|
Messenger Of Truth
Butlerian Crusade
94
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:26:50 -
[123] - Quote
This sounds really cool - though I'm not sure about invulnerable station gunners being able to shoot ninja miners though
Trade Hub Price Checker: stop.hammerti.me.uk/pricecheck
Visit "Haulers Channel" in game for all matters courier-related.
Structure name/system API: stop.hammerti.me.uk/api
|
Messenger Of Truth
Butlerian Crusade
94
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:30:20 -
[124] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Why would you not make moon minerals depletable and make those money moons respawn at random regions/systems rather then this. It would make for much more conent as not only would ppl have to scan down moons, but fights would occur much more often then what they do now.
Why not your suggestion combined with this?
ArmyOfMe wrote: Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks.
lowsec mining just got buffed
Trade Hub Price Checker: stop.hammerti.me.uk/pricecheck
Visit "Haulers Channel" in game for all matters courier-related.
Structure name/system API: stop.hammerti.me.uk/api
|
Frost Dalak
Ice Dalak Conglomerate
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:31:55 -
[125] - Quote
Couple of questions which have probably already been asked.
1) does the moon composition stay the same? So if i'm mining platinum from a moon after the change there will still be platinum there? Are there going to be new minerals? Or is everything being reshuffled?
2) What is the planned end for old Control towers/ Arrays. Recycling? Isk compemsation? How are you handling faction upgraded pos equipment?
Thanks |
Jack Reaper Jones
ShekelSquad Interhole Revenue Service
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:34:11 -
[126] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:A set of new Upwell Structures is in the works: Behold the Upwell Refineries! Refineries will be the premiere structure for resource collection and processing. They have bonuses to reprocessing and the exclusive ability to fit moon mining and reaction service modules.This will give us completely new gameplay for moon mining and reactions, as well as linking into future resource collection gameplay. Check out the exciting details in this blog Introducing Upwell Refineries
Why do you hate wormholes so much? Seriously. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
16
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:36:46 -
[127] - Quote
So, I see some good and some bad.
Physically mining the goo is fine I suppose. The market will figure that out and moon holders will charge for the privilege. It might generate a little content... as fun as dying mining or killing miners can be I guess. I give a plus to the fact that it opens up rarer moon mats to more junior members and that their efforts (mine really.. lol) might allow them to pursue industrial activities typically reserved for established moon hogs or senior leadership... cuz u know senior leadership aint gonna be out there grinding rocks, regardless of type.
What I don't like is reactions moving into the cits... more specifically, reactions becoming part of the standard industry UI.
As is, running reactions is one of the very few ways, at least that I've found, that a single toon can scale up operations to the limits of their time and isk available. That is to say, if I want to babysit 30 large faction towers, I'm free to do so.
Ofc, I need to be in a secure ls/ns alliance and it's a tens of billion of isk investment with a lot of risk and a fair upside.
Point being, reacting is an activity you can do with your main and need not be farmed out to a small army of alts like large scale PI or multi-toon t2 or t3 production with indy slot and/or planetary caps.
I'm the first in line to say that the POS reaction UI is dated and very buggy, but can't escape the reality that moving reactions into standard industry just adds another layer to arguably the most tedious production process (T2) and effectively removes running reactions as a main character vocation.
If you dislike the guy running a dozen towers soaked in isk, you'll really dislike the guy running 9 accounts with two dedicated trade alts grinding reactions for fractional margins that add up to a lot. Please don't turn reacting into station trading.
So, what would make sense then.
1) Keep reactions tethered to moon structures in such a way that a limited (one to three, depending on structure size, fit, and rigs) number that can be run per reaction cit
2) No limit on number of cits or reactions a single character can run.
3) Possibly limit the types of reactions (or provide significant financial penalties) that can be performed in low-sec.
Otherwise, here's what I forsee happening.
1) I dump all my cyno alts and retrain them in the refining skill cuz I no longer need to export from deep nul. 2) I park all my new reacting alts in a ls system one jump from a hs gate, 5 jumps to Jita 3) Trade alt in Jita, up a penny, up a penny, up a penny on raw moon mats (puking as I type this) 4) Undock JF, jump to cyno in ls, offload 5) log in toon after toon after toon and start running reaction bpo's 6) Fill up w finished reactions, undock and align to hs gate, always ready to redock so never die 7) Fly to Jita, place sell orders, down a penny, down a penny, down a penny (puking again)
Today there is huge volatility and opportunity in the reaction biz. Yes, this owes in part to the availability of moon goo, but it's also owing to the limited number of "slots=pos" to react in, the investment required, and the gluts and scarcity caused by everyone jumping on what's hot atm.
It's quite possible to win or lose big buying from sell orders and selling to buy. Remove that volatility and all the benefits accrue to the truly massive 6 account player who spends all day station spinning. |
Lexia Nova
GeneSia-IRC Axiom Vocation Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:37:24 -
[128] - Quote
I hope I am not being too optimistic too soon but the new moon mining plan actually has me a little excited! (As far as mining excitement goes mind you) but yea I certainly look forward to seeing how that plays out. |
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
43
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:37:40 -
[129] - Quote
Querns wrote:Lunarstorm95 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this? Yeah ur gana love this until you realize you will be mining weekly only for all ur moon roids to be going to the alliance, alliance is not gana let you keep the goo.... Alliance is not gana spend money on the fuel and refinery only to launch the roids into space and let the miners take what they can mine and go spend it on more crystals... alliance will need all the money it can get from the rocks to supplement srp and infrastructure costs. Even more so since it wont be able to mine nearly as many moons as they do now, so it will need every isk from the moon meaning you wont be getting a decent, if any, cut. Maybe your alliance won't let you keep the goo from refineries.
My point, alliance like goons can live without it, this patch is great for the big super bloc alliances, kills small/med alliances.
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6577
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:38:28 -
[130] - Quote
MidnightWyvern wrote:Rowells wrote:Last time I saw moon fracking like this there were tons of xenonorphs and it was generally bad week for everyone involved. Make us whole again?
Hole-y. it was a common mistranslation. Hole-y. As in full of holes.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
178
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:39:33 -
[131] - Quote
The two big questions with these is what will moon distribution look like and will they generate conflict. The first is yet to be determined, but lets talk about conflict.
Proposal: I urge there to be a pause on the extraction on first reinforcement and a cancel of the job completely on the 2nd timer.
Reasons:
Right now sov is boring. A lack of -meaningful- objectives to go after on a daily/weekly basis is the cause. The refineries mining moons have the potential to give us that daily/weekly content and provide players a method of true economic warfare.
The key here is what will happen on that first reinforcement timer.
If the answer is "The extraction job is Paused," then glorious content awaits us. Players will form fleets and set out to hostile space to hurt their opponents economically by reinforcing structures and pausing their paydays. This dynamic will lead to daily conflict.
If the answer is "Not much until the 2nd timer," then little content will be created:
Players won't want to form and grind through a reinforcement timer deep in hostile space only to come back on the 2nd timer to find a gigantic super fleet sitting on it. They will only do this if they intend to destroy the structure and control the moon for themselves - which is unlikely if they are venturing far away from home or deep into hostile territory. Conflict in this scenario will only happen every so often/rarely - about as often as they do today when moons change hands. Yes, players will form mining hunting parties, but we can already do this today and it's clear that it's not enough to keep things churning in sov. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3546
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:43:05 -
[132] - Quote
There are exactly two structures which profit from in-house reprocessing services, Refineries and Engineering Complexes. Why not giving EC also a bonus to reprocessing?
I mean without that, an optimal production setup would need both a Refinery + and EC, and mindless hauling of minerals from R to EC. This is IMO bad game design, to be able to improve performance only through grinding.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
MidnightWyvern
Night Theifs Curatores Veritatis Alliance
363
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:46:59 -
[133] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:MidnightWyvern wrote:Rowells wrote:Last time I saw moon fracking like this there were tons of xenonorphs and it was generally bad week for everyone involved. Make us whole again? Hole-y. it was a common mistranslation. Hole-y. As in full of holes. That certainly fits much better with what was actually going on.
Rattati Senpai noticed us! See you in the next FPS!
Alts: Saray Wyvern, Mobius Wyvern (Dust 514)
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2755
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:47:05 -
[134] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:Querns wrote:Lunarstorm95 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I love this, mainly because of all the tears from "passive income elites" who are now going to chase to either be poor OR (*GASP*) make room in their elite PVP only alliances/coaltions for dirty dirty Mining guys they will need protecting.
Did I mention that I love this? Yeah ur gana love this until you realize you will be mining weekly only for all ur moon roids to be going to the alliance, alliance is not gana let you keep the goo.... Alliance is not gana spend money on the fuel and refinery only to launch the roids into space and let the miners take what they can mine and go spend it on more crystals... alliance will need all the money it can get from the rocks to supplement srp and infrastructure costs. Even more so since it wont be able to mine nearly as many moons as they do now, so it will need every isk from the moon meaning you wont be getting a decent, if any, cut. Maybe your alliance won't let you keep the goo from refineries. My point, alliance like goons can live without it, this patch is great for the big super bloc alliances, kills small/med alliances.
How so? Tons of R64s are going to go up for grabs. There's no way the tiny iceberg alliances have the manpower to exploit them.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
90
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:57:54 -
[135] - Quote
Are you picturing it:
A lone prospect flies thru a system and noticed a moon goo belt with no one else in local. He lights a covert cyno, and 20-30 more prospects are bridged into the system.
After filling up their 10km3 holds, they all make it back home, dump off the goo, and look for another empty belt to bridge into. |
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1595
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:59:25 -
[136] - Quote
I pretty much agree with Querns on every count. I think a great many moons in sparcely populated nul/losec are about to go up for grabs. Any place with a poor population density is going to be borderline useless unless you care to titan bridge in a mining fleet.
WTB tickets to watch PL or NC. mining in titans.
And with moon mining moving to actual mining in ships, AFK cloakers and blops are going to suddenly become far more relevant.
Sad to see Syphons going away. But I can't see any situation where retooling them into some sort of auto-mining device wouldn't be seriously OP.
And finally, buy moon goo now.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
6745
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:07:32 -
[137] - Quote
Question: Will this mean an end to regionalized moon-goo sourcing?
Right now, T2 production in nulsec is virtually impossible, as it requires a wide assortment of moon products, from all over the universe. The materials are only reasonably obtained at a major trade hub, like Jita, which also means that manufacturing T2 in hisec rather nulsec is more convenient than importing moon products. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
16
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:07:35 -
[138] - Quote
Also, if the objective is to replace siphon units, encourage pvp, allow alliances to disrupt others' revenue streams, there has got to be a better way that to force peeps to physically mine an asteroid field.
At a bare minimum, the moon cit should provide the equivalent of rorq boosts within an appropriate zone.
Like others have said, that goo is gonna be the alliance's one way or the other. Why force ur recently converted alphas to die like flies in procs in those joyful "alliance mining ops."
If it's content ur after, or income deprivation, make a new "jackhammer" high slot that can break off a chunk and be stolen.
Make the moon chunk targetable/destroyable for 6-12 hours after it has "cleared the moon's atmosphere" and is nearly ready for the moon cit to process.
Aside from the fact that it's inconceivable that in a day and age where we've overcome biology and death that a 6B structure can't operate a mining laser... lol.. mining is boring. Killing miners is not challenging, and dying as a noob player/miner should be somewhat avoidable. You're just putting fish in a barrel. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:07:45 -
[139] - Quote
The Great Moon Goo Nerf of '17
Hear ye, hear ye, be it known that the Nerf Bat of Destruction has fallen upon the solo moon miners of New Eden.
Behold, the calculus of these wretched space losers:
Net Outcome of Moon Operations:
= Same at max. Potentially much lower. (Zero Gain.)
Net Inputs for Moon Mining:
1. Fuel costs for drilling = same
2. The activity of mining the asteroids = ++++++NERF++++++
Total nerf. The whole mining investment of time is 100% extra effort for no extra reward. watanerf.
In the TESTICLES.
That is what you get. I told ya. I said, "That is what ya get, for mining them moons."
Well, this means that the cost of moon goo, and all the things made from it (Tech 2), will go up, and bigly.
Oh my, the inflation in new eden!
Still, we can't throw out the good in search of the perfect.
Just the other day I was talking to my bro and I said "Bro", I said, "I think what we need here in nul sec is more mining."
"More mining?" he asked me.
"Yes" I said, all solemn and serious. "what with the ice mining and the ore mining, a fella can't get enough mining done so as not to get frightfully bored with the whole enterprise."
"I see." said my bro. But I could sort of tell that he didn't. |
Titus Tallang
EVE University Ivy League
197
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:09:53 -
[140] - Quote
When the patch removes certain rigs from existing ECs/Citadels, what hangar will they end up in?
Director of Education - EVE University - http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/
|
|
Gyges Skyeye
Dissidence Dawn The-Culture
41
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:11:22 -
[141] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:This is a bit of a wild idea, but it's a thought that would throw a bone to lowsec.
What if the quality of these moon belts were inversely proportional to the security status of the system compared to what we have now (where the lower the truesec, the better the asteroid belts, rats, moons, etc)? Higher truesec would have better moon belts, meaning that lowsec would be the go-to for harvesting moon minerals.
....
This would also make nullsec sov with poor truesec a better place to call home, in addition to throwing a bone to lowsec.
A mix of gradients as to what defines 'good' space enriches the game. I would support this change. (As a corollary further sharpening the distinction by increasing ratting and ore variant payouts in the large truesec ares if this idea went through)
Winter Archipelago wrote: A lore-related bit behind this is that a part of the reason that highsec is highsec is because that's where the best resources / minerals are at (with the empires holding exclusive rights on the "good" ore there, and our scanners being prevented from even seeing it in the belts), and it's where the empires are most willing to defend (beyond simply having a manpower-related reason). From 0.5 through 1.0, the resources are good enough that the empires are willing to put forth a significant amount of effort to defend them. 0.1 through 0.4 are still empire, but aren't good enough for the empires to put effort into their own mining operations, thus opening it to Capsuleers.
As good a story as any. I would just add the extra irony of placing enriched variety R8 moons into high sec since the Empires couldn't be bothered to tower refinery those moons. |
Lain Deudigren
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:12:46 -
[142] - Quote
Any comment on the mass purchase of Hypersynaptic Fibers after the CSM summit.
Something you want to investigate CCP? |
Linkoman
Dutch East Querious Company Asteria Concord.
12
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:16:28 -
[143] - Quote
love all the 1337 pee-vee-pee tears from this. Hell if someone needs to actually work for their money. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:22:00 -
[144] - Quote
The key to this new system generating content is that it must be relatively easy to ninja loot the ore fields of weak moon mining operations.
If folks living out in null sec, good hard working pirates and the like, can't get in and steal themselves some good moon ore, well the system is broken. There will be no content and the whole thing will be just another inflationary nerf. If the pirates can steal the ore, well then the moon miners just got RAPED as well as nerfed. I mean, they will be out of business. If they are paying for ice to fuel the mining module and then pirates steal all their good ore and wreck a few barges for lols......
Game over, man. Game over.
And so that cant happen and so it wont be possible to steal moon goo effectively because null bears.
Once again, the wizards of CCP have set up a game mechanic that is vulnerable to blobs and extraordinarily time consuming, in return for no actual improvement in the actual game, as it stands.
They have literally unveiled mining as the great new game play mechanic. The names of the asteroids have been changed.
You wot?
You have had years of meetings. Thousands of man hours.
So that you all could rebrand the SAME MINING MECHANIC and pass it off as the next big thing.
Does anyone at CCP do any work at all anymore?
|
DragonHelm III
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
30
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:32:35 -
[145] - Quote
Sounds good.
Would be nice if you could add the NPC Mining fleets to them as well. NPCs need that good goo and would create a hazard to the unwary |
Xenuria
1116
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:37:40 -
[146] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:> We will be issuing appropriate compensation for owners of any rigs that have their build costs reduced.
Someone please check if CSM profiteers have manipulated this market and bought a massive amount of rigs 3 days ago as well.
Hi, I am Xenuria. I am on the CSM and I don't know how to market manipulate. Are there specific people on the CSM who you are alleging of misdeeds or just the institution as a whole?
Accusing somebody barely capable of basic addition and subtraction of market manipulation is kind of stupid.
CSM 12 Candidate
|
Lothros Andastar
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
206
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:41:26 -
[147] - Quote
I for one support this change. Making moon mining impossible for anyone except massive alliances will help fill goon coffers |
Cherry Sulphate
ojingo
40
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:43:21 -
[148] - Quote
these changes sound fantastic. like, gocompare level fantastic. |
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale Black Marker
968
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:46:14 -
[149] - Quote
Xenuria wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:> We will be issuing appropriate compensation for owners of any rigs that have their build costs reduced.
Someone please check if CSM profiteers have manipulated this market and bought a massive amount of rigs 3 days ago as well. Hi, I am Xenuria. I am on the CSM and I don't know how to market manipulate. Are there specific people on the CSM who you are alleging of misdeeds or just the institution as a whole? Accusing somebody barely capable of basic addition and subtraction of market manipulation is kind of stupid. Your trolling gets progressively worse.
When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.
|
Miles Tullius Eldard
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:51:43 -
[150] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:Make these structures like a movable ships you can anchor and call them Mooncrackers.
So you mean a RORQUAL? |
|
Gunner
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:58:07 -
[151] - Quote
Isn't it very likely many low end moons will not see any refinery in orbit as long as they live?
One isn't going through all this trouble for Carbides, or moon goo prices must skyrocket in general.
I guess all inventors will have to find a mining job lol. |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force IT'S ONLY PIXELS
231
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:02:04 -
[152] - Quote
My initial thoughts on these proposed changes are that it penalises small, specialised corporations and alliances whilst simultaneously making a lot easier for the larger alliances with support networks, either rental alliances or diversified memberships. More money going to the select few which exacerbates the problems in Eve.
My corporation has a modest moon mining operation. It pays the bills and limited SRP for our members. We are not rich to begin with and, being specialised as PvP, make less per month than your average incursion runner makes in a day. Similarly, our Alliance isn't big. like us it's specialised along PvP lines. We don't have copious amounts of Titans, our R64s pay for a modest SRP programme to help everyone enjoy doing what they do.
We now need to diversify and find miners. Miners aren't going to mine for nothing so our already modest income is going to take a significant hit. It means we become less attractive for players than larger alliances whose income will barely be affected with this proposed change. If lots of small, independant alliances go under and all Eve is left with is large power blocs, then the game stagnates which not only does that undermine what the new sov attempted to achieve but how is it possibly going to be healthy for the game.
I understand what you're trying to achieve here and I'm fully onboard with having more people in space, it's what the game's desperately needed for years now, but that has to be balanced against the harm you're going to do to those who don't want to be part of major power blocs. You need to find some way to shift the balance of income so it's spread out more evenly across a more diverse player base rather than trying to force square pegs into round holes.
13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
|
walker260
new eden regimental navy Rebel Alliance of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:03:57 -
[153] - Quote
I love the new ideas on the structures! Awesome. But One thing that I think should be discussed is the ability for these refining structures to use the "Excavator" drones like the Rorqual can. Mediums can use 5. Large scan use 10?? This sounds like a good idea to me. Then whoever is in control of the structure during mining ops can actually mine too! And would help cover these large amounts of moon mining that will need done! ( with the same Siege mode Yield as Rorqual too) |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:03:58 -
[154] - Quote
Linus Gorp wrote:Xenuria wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:> We will be issuing appropriate compensation for owners of any rigs that have their build costs reduced.
Someone please check if CSM profiteers have manipulated this market and bought a massive amount of rigs 3 days ago as well. Hi, I am Xenuria. I am on the CSM and I don't know how to market manipulate. Are there specific people on the CSM who you are alleging of misdeeds or just the institution as a whole? Accusing somebody barely capable of basic addition and subtraction of market manipulation is kind of stupid. Your trolling gets progressively worse.
Suggesting that EVE Players who get the opportunity to use exclusive knowledge to gain a personal advantage would do so? Hm, that can't be true. This is a game full of honest people and the CSM members are the most trustworthy of us. After all they are bound by CSM-mechanics to actually be the players voice instead of just using the CSM to lobby CCP in their own best interest! None of them of would ever ever ever ever talk to their best in-game mate about what to buy or sell right now. And CSM candidates are not counting on voting-support by their Alliances because everyone knows it will give them a Spai @ CCP. How dare you even suggest such a thing, you rabble-rouser! |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:05:41 -
[155] - Quote
That moon goo would have to be astronomically lucrative to bother trying to steal it. Think like vital core deposit x 5.
Mining is not fun. It's what you do to get started in the game and if it's your thing, you skill into a Rorq.
I do have to give credit for Rorqs and excavators. A fine example of making a living wage available to the dedicated single account miner.
Now put him at a set place at a set time... fun fun.
You can't escape isk per hour. Going 22 jumps for a prospect full of ore aint gonna happen and everyone is going to have more than enough mining that has to be done in their own systems to bother fleeting to someone else's to mine.
I want to play on my main account! Yeah, I'll sub a few alts for cynos or trade, but multibox mining, multi-box indy, multi-box anything really is not fun. You do it because you have to.
Just let me collect my moon stuffs from my pos's (or new cit-thingie) on my main so when I hear there's a fight going on, I dock, reship, and go. I can talk in alliance and people know who the hell I am. Why the need for three accounts to run 30 reactions when one account can now?
Why open up reacting to every Tom, ****, and Harry who can buy a bpo? It just adds another step to the t2 process.. react mats, build components, build ships instead of just starting from building components. This is fun? To what end? The moon guy had a role to play in his alliance, like the FC, the indy director, etc.. now we're all gonna be miners :(
This does not stop the rich from getting richer. Massive multibox fleets of alts that don't care about their killboards will mine these rocks relatively undefended and the ship losses added to a spreadsheet and accounted for in the sell price. Cost of doing business.
Everyone go to Jita and fire your mining lasers at the monument. NO MORE MINING
|
Xenuria
1116
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:06:52 -
[156] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:Linus Gorp wrote:Xenuria wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:> We will be issuing appropriate compensation for owners of any rigs that have their build costs reduced.
Someone please check if CSM profiteers have manipulated this market and bought a massive amount of rigs 3 days ago as well. Hi, I am Xenuria. I am on the CSM and I don't know how to market manipulate. Are there specific people on the CSM who you are alleging of misdeeds or just the institution as a whole? Accusing somebody barely capable of basic addition and subtraction of market manipulation is kind of stupid. Your trolling gets progressively worse. Suggesting that EVE Players who get the opportunity to use exclusive knowledge to gain a personal advantage would do so? Hm, that can't be true. This is a game full of honest people and the CSM members are the most trustworthy of us. After all they are bound by CSM-mechanics to actually be the players voice instead of just using the CSM to lobby CCP in their own best interest! None of them of would ever ever ever ever talk to their best in-game mate about what to buy or sell right now. And CSM candidates are not counting on voting-support by their Alliances because everyone knows it will give them a Spai @ CCP. How dare you even suggest such a thing, you rabble-rouser!
facepalm...
CSM 12 Candidate
|
demolitiona
Angry Rock Killers Inc. Serrice Council.
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:08:46 -
[157] - Quote
Lots... and lost of questions.
Are there going to be new or special modules for mining the moon rocks that come out of the station? What kind of boosts or changes are going to be organically applied to the mining ships? Are there going to be new skills that miners are going to have to train to mine such moon ore? Is there going to be a ship specifically for moon mining? Can this moon ore be compressed? Refined by ninja miners? What kind of general effect is expected on the price of moon material when this takes place?
I have more, but I'm still trying to shake the nervousness surrounding the kinds of wars that will result when you pull the POS's out and make them unable to moon mine.
Is there a transition that will take place with these? How do you plan to control this transition effectively without upsetting all of the moon mining networks currently in place?
|
Gunner
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:16:16 -
[158] - Quote
Xenuria wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:> We will be issuing appropriate compensation for owners of any rigs that have their build costs reduced.
Someone please check if CSM profiteers have manipulated this market and bought a massive amount of rigs 3 days ago as well. Hi, I am Xenuria. I am on the CSM and I don't know how to market manipulate. Are there specific people on the CSM who you are alleging of misdeeds or just the institution as a whole? Accusing somebody barely capable of basic addition and subtraction of market manipulation is kind of stupid.
He only asked if someone could check. Not such a strange thing to ask, considering. |
Gunner
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:23:25 -
[159] - Quote
Oh, I almost forgot.......can Alpha clones be part of all this sweetness? |
Sar'Duakar
Ghetto Sultans
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:23:48 -
[160] - Quote
If all the current miner's are busy mining the regular stuff. Veldspar, Scordite etc, who the hell is going to mine the new moon goo?
I'll be damned if i am giving up what little time I have to pvp, to now mine to line someone else's pockets.
12 Years of playing, I make my isk through reaction's. Sometimes moon mining. Your now telling me I have to recruit X amount of people into my corp, to mine, to line my own pockets to fund my pvp? And thats after I've invested maybe billions(?) into a Citadel that by the end of the week could be blown up by the big aliance next door, purley for *****, giggles and KB stats?
That will go down like a ton of bricks.
Was any consideration to the little guy given in this "idea"?? |
|
Centurax
Eve Engineering Authority Eve Engineering
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:29:22 -
[161] - Quote
Moon Drilling/Mining in Wormholes and even High Sec please, that would be really amazing for the game new content for all is what we are looking for.
Even if the materials are restricted in High Sec to what are currently R8, R16 and Gases I don't see that necessary breaking the market seeing as someone has to mine it unlike the current press start and wait..
WHs are prefect for this type of mining, also more content for everyone, and I don't just mean the miners .
|
mkint
1669
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:48:33 -
[162] - Quote
Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome!
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:53:31 -
[163] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:My initial thoughts on these proposed changes are that it penalises small, specialised corporations and alliances whilst simultaneously making a lot easier for the larger alliances with support networks, either rental alliances or diversified memberships. More money going to the select few which exacerbates the problems in Eve.
My corporation has a modest moon mining operation. It pays the bills and limited SRP for our members. We are not rich to begin with and, being specialised as PvP, make less per month than your average incursion runner makes in a day. Similarly, our Alliance isn't big. like us it's specialised along PvP lines. We don't have copious amounts of Titans, our R64s pay for a modest SRP programme to help everyone enjoy doing what they do.
We now need to diversify and find miners. Miners aren't going to mine for nothing so our already modest income is going to take a significant hit. It means we become less attractive for players than larger alliances whose income will barely be affected with this proposed change. If lots of small, independant alliances go under and all Eve is left with is large power blocs, then the game stagnates which not only does that undermine what the new sov attempted to achieve but how is it possibly going to be healthy for the game.
I understand what you're trying to achieve here and I'm fully onboard with having more people in space, it's what the game's desperately needed for years now, but that has to be balanced against the harm you're going to do to those who don't want to be part of major power blocs. You need to find some way to shift the balance of income so it's spread out more evenly across a more diverse player base rather than trying to force square pegs into round holes.
My point exactly, but its downed out by the random 3 man groups who now are super excited about grabbing there 1 money moon, while med sized alliance die over funding because we cant chuck 3/4 of our member base into mining fleets.
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:54:54 -
[164] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:My initial thoughts on these proposed changes are that it penalises small, specialised corporations and alliances whilst simultaneously making a lot easier for the larger alliances with support networks, either rental alliances or diversified memberships. More money going to the select few which exacerbates the problems in Eve.
My corporation has a modest moon mining operation. It pays the bills and limited SRP for our members. We are not rich to begin with and, being specialised as PvP, make less per month than your average incursion runner makes in a day. Similarly, our Alliance isn't big. like us it's specialised along PvP lines. We don't have copious amounts of Titans, our R64s pay for a modest SRP programme to help everyone enjoy doing what they do.
We now need to diversify and find miners. Miners aren't going to mine for nothing so our already modest income is going to take a significant hit. It means we become less attractive for players than larger alliances whose income will barely be affected with this proposed change. If lots of small, independant alliances go under and all Eve is left with is large power blocs, then the game stagnates which not only does that undermine what the new sov attempted to achieve but how is it possibly going to be healthy for the game.
I understand what you're trying to achieve here and I'm fully onboard with having more people in space, it's what the game's desperately needed for years now, but that has to be balanced against the harm you're going to do to those who don't want to be part of major power blocs. You need to find some way to shift the balance of income so it's spread out more evenly across a more diverse player base rather than trying to force square pegs into round holes.
My point exactly, but its downed out by all the random 3 man groups who now are super excited about grabbing there 1 money moon, while med sized alliance die over funding because we cant chuck 3/4 of our member base into mining fleets.
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2758
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 20:57:45 -
[165] - Quote
mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome!
So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Ryder 'ook
Angry Angels Core Cohortes Triarii
147
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:00:47 -
[166] - Quote
When I read about these changes, a couple of thoughts crossed my mind.
Might it be prudent to actually befriend a few of those looked-down-upon carebears from highsec and talk them into moon mining operations while actually actively protecting them during said operations?
Could it be possible that the walls of contempt between the different playstyles will start to crumble? A little bit at least? Respect a miner? If only because he ensures your continued SRP?
All of this will make sense only if CCP reshuffles and slightly adjusts the material compositions between different regions and moons, of course. That way, given the fact that many many moons will become ripe for harvest every day, they can't all be blobbed and blocked but there will be a fuckton of emergent gameplay flowing from it. In many regions. All the time. Sounds good, doesn't it? Don't wanna mine? - Protect a miner!
It could all tank horribly. But it could also be a pretty cool thing.
Personally, I'm looking forward to it. Change is good!
Every atom in our bodies was forged in the furnace of ancient stars - it's time we return home.
|
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
441
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:05:01 -
[167] - Quote
Will I be able to get multiple moon materials from one moon with the changes? For example, will a Dysprosium moon spawn rocks that yield only Dysprosium, or will they refine into multiple minerals, such as Titanium or Technetium as well? Will I be able to get small amounts of rarer moons from a lower-tier moon? Will there be new mining crystals for these moon materials?
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
Hoshi
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
58
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:07:13 -
[168] - Quote
Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse? I do see a future where several of the large blocks like PL and Goons actively going around with their supers and killing drilling refineries just to stop others from gaining utilizing those moons that they don't want to use themselves.
"Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."
|
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:13:45 -
[169] - Quote
Moons won't be "freed up." It's just more tedium to extract the goodies.
Anyone planning on taking a fleet of hulks into PL space to mine under their cit's guns, nm their fleet?
Sign me up for that.. lol.
It just adds another layer to the tt2 process, so the real winners will be mission runners and anyone who hunts faction bpc's, since they're basically all superior to t2 anyhow.
In fact, there's no point to even having basic or intermediate moon mats if all that has to be done to refine them is run a bpo, aside from eating up finite industry.... errr... reaction slots and forcing alts into the reacting business.
Also kills any efficiencies one might gain by running a complex reaction at a moon that produces an ingredient for a mid-range input. It ALL has to be mined and built like t2 components.
If we're gonna have to mine it, at least cut out the two bullcrud steps of basic and intermediate and just have Crystalline Carbide and Ferrogel moons... ok, so maybe unrefined ferrogel...
But seriously, the point to adding two more steps to t2 production is what again? And adding mining to a production process that has never relied heavily on it?
Would be an easier pill to swallow if the goal was clear. Is the goal to see people who hate mining but are forced to die horribly?
You know what used to generate meaningful content and pvp? SOV warfare... that is until it was turned into mining.... errrr.. entosisisng |
Lobo de Madera
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:17:32 -
[170] - Quote
Another sad day for EVE ONLINE!
|
|
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji.
2105
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:17:34 -
[171] - Quote
Timers and alarm clock ops. Because CCP knows we love that stuff.
Alternatively it could be called "we can't think of an actual game mechanic, so here, have more timers". |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:22:53 -
[172] - Quote
Alright miners...
Alliance needs a ship-ton of evaporite deposits and atmospheric gases cuz you slackers haven't been meeting quotas.
How many times have I told you all not to cherry pick the high-value moon mats, or the ores worth 20 times more like scordite?
MANDATORY mining op now, paying 80% of Jita Buy... |
Nivek Steyer
CPE1704TKS SWARTA.
36
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:27:34 -
[173] - Quote
Centurax wrote:Moon Drilling/Mining in Wormholes and even High Sec please, that would be really amazing for the game new content for all is what we are looking for. Even if the materials are restricted in High Sec to what are currently R8, R16 and Gases I don't see that necessary breaking the market seeing as someone has to mine it unlike the current press start and wait.. WHs are prefect for this type of mining, also more content for everyone, and I don't just mean the miners .
I must agree. Allow WH and HS to do this as well. There is absolutely no reason not to allow the content across the platform. I know CCP is so concerned about T2 prices. Whatever happened to the T2 were originally supped to cost 2x at T1. I remember that. All moon mining became in reality was the passive cash cow. Would be nice for once, for the content to go across the cluster instead of just to null sec, cause in the end that is where it will happen majority of the time. CCP please give the content across the cluster, we need more life in the game not limitation to if your in a special alliance or null sec only. Cheers and I hope that we see the content for all to enjoy and prey upon.
|
El Criscado
Mongorian Horde
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:38:30 -
[174] - Quote
I don't see a problem with this. The vast amount of AFK mining that happens with moons will be replaced with something that requires interaction, which will force major null alliances to either recruit carebears or they will have to shrink their borders. All in all, not a bad change. |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:40:15 -
[175] - Quote
I find it seriously funny how in a Universe in which we can use Structures to build other such Structures and Spaceships of immense complexity we still have to take the pickaxe (be it the cool T2 pickaxe for all I care) in our hands to acquire basic materials. The new Structures will be able to somehow disconnect a large piece of an astronomic entity with serious gravitational powers and "beam it up", somehow make that huge piece explode into perfectly digestable smaller pieces, but for some reason beyond my understanding of logic it cannot go the next step and do what a Venture can do. |
Gyges Skyeye
Dissidence Dawn The-Culture
41
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:40:57 -
[176] - Quote
Hoshi wrote:Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse? I do see a future where several of the large blocks like PL and Goons actively going around with their supers and killing drilling refineries just to stop others from gaining utilizing those moons that they don't want to use themselves.
This would actually be nice in the way of exposing those supers/titans to be ambushed each time.
The most forgotten fact of Eve is that it's universe is mostly empty. Pick a well known populated system and go 5 jumps. There's a good chance you have the place to yourself or nearly so. If your playing at off peak times, almost certainly so. They can't possibly keep it all under their control.
Cluster wide hegemony is definitely a thing to be concerned of, but outside of Serenity where botting is basically legal, there just isn't enough sheer manpower to make it happen. This whole change is aimed at -increasing- the labor hours required to make things. Which does entrench the haves (who got their stuff before increased labor hours) but it also makes it much harder for the haves to become 'have all's that you fear. |
Gyges Skyeye
Dissidence Dawn The-Culture
41
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:45:45 -
[177] - Quote
Thoughts #1:
Any time we can move player driven gameplay and organized events into scheduled timers is a good thing. Those timers act like Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) (Gosh you need to backronym this into something in game) bringing players together for content.
Sub thoughts: 1. Any methods we can use, within reason, to expose these timers in a moderately aggregated and anonymized way, displayed in game, will be extremely valuable in guiding players towards content. Emphasis on within reason. A new map stat GÇô Fracking Activity Detected, simply giving a regional (or at worst constellation) count of ongoing fracking processes, would probably suffice.
Thoughts #2: Given how moon mining is becoming an active process, us players will need to take new approaches to organizing and disrupting these activities and will need new tools to be creative in doing so.
Potential Organizational Ideas: 1. First on the subject of asteroid layout in these moon belts; letGÇÖs make this process more dynamic, avoiding straight forward min-max theory from developing, leaving room for expression of player skill, and allowing room for accidents to happen.
How? Billiards! We can use the new fighter interface and tactical camera to have a simple minigame where we line up and shoot the detonation charge at the rotating moon chunk. The simplified ballistics of which determines where our new asteroids will land. Gives us a new belt layout every time. LetGÇÖs practiced demolitions operators kind of keep belts closer to safety, lets inexperienced demolitions operators cause hilarity. Plus, it will look cool.
2. Before CCP took itGÇÖs own direction with Rorquals I had an idea that they should be transformed into a platform for horizontally scaling mining architecture rather than the new apex miner that they were reworked into (which meant that everyone just mines in rorquals now *frowny face*). Now that refineries will be on grid with the moon belts in what is intended to be a collaborative gameplay, we can consider inserting those features here. My idea was to introduce mining service drones that provided utility rather than raw mining stats. That utility could be applied in the form of increasing quality of life for mining ships and thus their *applied* mining rates, rather than just stat boosting the max rates which would cause the markets to crash(*hmm*).
Mining service drones: (fighter sized things) A. Retrieval Drone: Scoops out ore from the target shipGÇÖs cargo and ore holds, (potentially compressing it,) and returns this ore to the mothershipGÇÖs own stores. Requires no consent allowing use offensively and defensively. Streamlines the process of jet can mining and saves the lives of PvPers forced to join Mining CTAs.
(note these were thought of long before PANIC was a thing) B.) Warp Core Boosting drone: A drone that gives the target an additional +n points of warp strength to target ship. An anti-point. C.) Sacrificial auxiliary shield drone: Consumable one use drones that add grey health/overshields to target. C.b)Sacrifical PANIC drone: Consumable one use drone that gives a short PANIC duration to the target. Might be the more modern way of doing it.
3. Ledgers: These will be a net GÇÿgood thingGÇÖ. However, IGÇÖm not sure that ninja mining showing up on these ledgers is the best idea. Detectable siphons made them pointless. Punch card mining logs will do the same to ninja mining. There are a few options I can think of for addressing it. Each has their own pros and cons.
A.) Make ledgers operate from a reciprocally validated Access List. WouldnGÇÖt track ninja mines. This has the potential to get unwieldy fast. Especially for NRDS organizations like Provibloc.
B.) Make ledgers operate from proposed Retrieval Drones. This lets collection and tracking of ore be handled in one step. Any ore some ninja warps off or docks with goes untracked, and unpaid. Probably the most convenient for all parties. However it operates under the assumption of the implementation of Retrieval Drones and presence of a Refinery (or drone user) in the mining op.
C.) Put ledgers into the Ihubs themselves. This would be a catch all that covers ice and ore anoms. However this can be untenable for renters who are stuck waiting on landlord bureaucracy to find out the results of their ledger.
*disruptive ideas to come in another post later.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Mercenary Coalition
324
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:49:25 -
[178] - Quote
Curious as to how it's going to work with all the 'crap' materials, the silicates, atmospheric gases etc, that underpin reactions - are people going to want to mine those? or will they be just contained in lots of the ore types from the moon crust as by-products?
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
48
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:50:34 -
[179] - Quote
Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse?
I don't know what you don't get... in theory maybe but no one will be able to harvest them in enough capacity to matter.....
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
542
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:01:11 -
[180] - Quote
as others have mentioned including myself.. ccp just caused one hell of a headache for t2 production.
you guys need to nerf ccp rise's favorite faction crap because now you just killed t2 production and are making t2 ships and its mod even more expensive than ever before.
smh.. i cant believe these dudes came up with this process. |
|
Orakkus
Imperium Technologies DARKNESS.
338
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:02:14 -
[181] - Quote
I didn't see it in the posts (might have missed it), are reprocessing facilities going to be removed then from Engineering citadels when Refineries go live?
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers EVEolution.
483
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:09:49 -
[182] - Quote
I think large alliances have just gotten WAY to used to such huge amounts of no effort passive income from some of the comments in here XD |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
542
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:15:55 -
[183] - Quote
Orakkus wrote:I didn't see it in the posts (might have missed it), are reprocessing facilities going to be removed then from Engineering citadels when Refineries go live?
current rigs will be unfitted from the structures. so you decide if you want to put it back in or into the refinery.. the refinery will provide the bonus to refinement via the service mods..
so by default.. you just spent 1 rig slot on the refinery... good luck on figuring out the 2 slots.. and brace for the t2 rig version.. guess that also means somebody better do some calibration math quick.. cause its not looking pretty at all.
|
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:26:22 -
[184] - Quote
First here is my counter-proposal: Basic idea: make Moon-Mining more Active by not making it a stupid AFK-Mining-Fleet.
Introduce the new Structures, make Moon-Mining an Industry Job with a Moon-Mining Skill (just as you plan to do it for Moon Reactions, which is great) and in order to change the current problem of rich-guys sitting on the moons, just change the current mechanics of the same moon always having the same Goo.
More concrete: randomly spawn ressources on moons (if you need lore: some tectonic movement revealed... your geologist found...) and let them be depleted after some time (either random or fixed depending on the size of the moon-mineral deposit - because ressources deplete on Planets too and they are Planets and not tiny little moons). It would force people to do moon-scans if they want to stay in business, to move their installations rather than just sitting on them and it allows for some move diversity in the T2-market.
Plus it would offer some true opportunity to the Highsec Dweller who wishes to acquire some Moon-Goo by doing the simple calculation of risk vs. reward (e.g. putting up some 800M Structure to mine r64 Goo on some moon noone else found yet - hoping that noone will notice their structure within the next week so it becomes profitable). In regard to this I'd also suggest to not show the Mining Platforms on the Star Map or as a Beacon (just like POS now), but to force people actively looking for them.
Now the critic of the current outlines:
Read all the posts, look at who is writing it and you will basically see the types: * already rich SOV Null Entity guy loves the idea, trying hard to convince others it'll be great and hide that only he will profit * Lowsec Dudes shocked how CCP again shifts to a little less fun, a little more grind * Wormholies trying to get additional source of income (tbf, WH is risky enough for most so it should pay out) * Highseccers dreaming of the day they can make Null profits with less risk (pro tip: Sov Nullsec is already less risky than Highsec)
The one good thing that could come out of it is the end of largely passive income for the already rich... Muahahahahaha!!!111 It just forces them to behave more like other Null Lords and find mining contractors willing to pay to be allowed mining their fields for some margin of profit.
Any small-time guy or gal who already got moisty, do you really think that with the current outlines anything apart from Ninja-Mining will suddenly become profitable or even doable? Do you really think that any Alliance will allow anyone to just use moons in "their" area, wether they use them or not? If people can't make a profit for themselves, it doesn't mean that they won't be motivated destroying your efforts to make some. If it was any different you'd all be already out there Moon Mining with the current mechanics (some are, which is good, but it will be harder for them in the future).
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
6745
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:40:00 -
[185] - Quote
Orakkus wrote:I didn't see it in the posts (might have missed it), are reprocessing facilities going to be removed then from Engineering citadels when Refineries go live? Yes. Rigs will be refunded. The service module can already be removed.
You can then choose to put the rigs back on, at likely a reduced reprocessing yield (no rig bonus from structure). |
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:43:05 -
[186] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:[b] Do you really think that any Alliance will allow anyone to just use moons in "their" area, wether they use them or not? If people can't make a profit for themselves, it doesn't mean that they won't be motivated destroying your efforts to make some. If it was any different you'd all be already out there Moon Mining with the current mechanics (some are, which is good, but it will be harder for them in the future).
Hell no nobody will let someone else mine in "their area" . These changes do make Alliance level income much harder for groups that currently get some income from moon mining. Probably need some ESS type method or Alliance taxes for Alliances to suck isk from ratter bounties. The big null alliances already have renting programs because of the isk it brings in, hell now those guys might charge more for the moon mining option. |
Penance Toralen
Compass Fox
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 22:48:47 -
[187] - Quote
I will start with the preface that mining is the introduction to Industry. Mining Barges requires Science and Industry skills - which are the pillars of an Industry career. So here we are talking about Refining which is the immediate step from harvesting and structures to support this. But no where in the entire conversation about Upwell so far is "introductory citadel". So, what happened to "the promise being kept to big and small".
Can there be limits to being able to anchor citadels. As a small note of history I participated in a war-dec to obtain a moon from another corporation. Location, Location, Location. It was to anchor a POS. Conflict over a resource is a cornerstone of this game. But no longer. There is no limit to the number of citadels or their position. There should be more reasons to flight, this is one less.
Can there be places where citadels cannot be placed. Similar to how shattered wormholes work. Logistics adds vulnerability and rewards ingenuity. How, where or why, I'll leave up to you, CCP. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2760
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:06:19 -
[188] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse? I don't know what you don't get... in theory maybe but no one will be able to harvest them in enough capacity to matter.....
Considering we don't know how big the exploded asteroids will be or what their yield will be, I fail to see how you can possibly know this.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2760
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:07:54 -
[189] - Quote
Hoshi wrote:Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse? I do see a future where several of the large blocks like PL and Goons actively going around with their supers and killing drilling refineries just to stop others from gaining utilizing those moons that they don't want to use themselves.
If this was going to happen, we'd already be doing it. POS are quite a stitch easier to take out, and require far fewer folks to exploit once owned.
The idea that we'd somehow start doing this after the process is changed to take longer and require several orders of magnitude more manpower is uniquely insane.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Orakkus
Imperium Technologies DARKNESS.
338
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:08:33 -
[190] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:
The one good thing that could come out of it is the end of largely passive income for the already rich... Muahahahahaha!!!111 It just forces them to behave more like other Null Lords and find mining contractors willing to pay to be allowed mining their fields for some margin of profit.
Not sure how you came up with that.. at least directly. Sure, we don't know specifics, but it has gone from being a huge passive isk generator to an isk generator that requires bodies to run well. Stuff like that usually ends up removing isk in the long run. And with the numbers of moons many of the larger alliances have, you are talking a lot of potential drama and diplomacy issues too. Not to mention the fact that quite a few low-sec and null-sec alliances are going to be seeing if they can muscle their way into the mix as well.
Plus, I didn't see if moons were limited to just one refinery or if more can be had.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2760
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:09:13 -
[191] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:Moons won't be "freed up." It's just more tedium to extract the goodies.
Anyone planning on taking a fleet of hulks into PL space to mine under their cit's guns, nm their fleet?
Sign me up for that.. lol.
Moons will be "freed up" in the sense that it makes zero sense to pay fuel every month to hold a moon that you lack the manpower to exploit.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2760
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:10:37 -
[192] - Quote
ITTigerClawIK wrote:I think large alliances have just gotten WAY to used to such huge amounts of no effort passive income from some of the comments in here XD Agreed. Nerf the big alliances!
Hrm, wait...
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:15:23 -
[193] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:
Read all the posts, look at who is writing it and you will basically see the types: * already rich SOV Null Entity guy loves the idea, trying hard to convince others it'll be great and hide that only he will profit * Lowsec Dudes shocked how CCP again shifts to a little less fun, a little more grind * Wormholies trying to get additional source of income (tbf, WH is risky enough for most so it should pay out) * Highseccers dreaming of the day they can make Null profits with less risk (pro tip: Sov Nullsec is already less risky than Highsec)
The one good thing that could come out of it is the end of largely passive income for the already rich... Muahahahahaha!!!111 It just forces them to behave more like other Null Lords and find mining contractors willing to pay to be allowed mining their fields for some margin of profit.
Any small-time guy or gal who already got moisty, do you really think that with the current outlines anything apart from Ninja-Mining will suddenly become profitable or even doable? Do you really think that any Alliance will allow anyone to just use moons in "their" area, wether they use them or not? If people can't make a profit for themselves, it doesn't mean that they won't be motivated destroying your efforts to make some. If it was any different you'd all be already out there Moon Mining with the current mechanics (some are, which is good, but it will be harder for them in the future).
Duh, I thought this was pretty clear already. Doesn't take a genius, EVE has experience with the introduction of this kind of systemic mechanisms with origins in mechanical (as opposed to behavoural) focus. It's an exact repeat of the POS Moon Mining introduction once upon a time.
@ CCP, it's been a long road and you've learned a lot, New Eden and you are better for it. But as it stands now, this is a conceptual catch22 which seems to have sprung from something which I haven't seen in a long time: an approach from mechanical to behavioural, whereas the awesome experience built up with this behavioural pressure cooker called EVE demonstrates that the approach should be the other way around.
That prevents stumbling into perception problems as well as the old adagio of n+1, but it also provides balances between the metrics and indexes versus the actual required dynamic nature of the pressure cooker.
It should be clear that just about every response you are going to get is geared around interests, you know this. It isn't hard to extrapolate behavioural effects from the current state of proposed changes and introductions.
The gist of it is that it promotes short term upheaval at a cost of long term affirmation of status quo behaviour. Yes, it introduces new conflict niches, but you cannot look at those without also looking at the frame they exist in and the dependencies shared by the people operating those frames. Yes, I can see the consequences for the precious indexes, but this state follows the same pattern as the original POS concepts introduced once upon a time very very very long ago.
To be blunt, I like the concept. I can see where it is coming from (literally, I've seen ancient player proposals on the old forums and friggin Google Docs that are an exact match for this - but yes, I can also see the line of thinking, but keep in mind that in mechanical design focus form follows function, while you essentially deal with behaviour). But the direction of that line has the wrong starting point. You're looking at consequence models, whereas a decade plus of EVE demonstrates that it is the effects that matter. Subtle but significant difference.
The irony here is that this current state of what is presented would actually be as required for instigating a pattern of dynamic shifts for recurring conflict niches (and catalysts) if you added resource migration/depletion to the mix. How odd. Are you sure this isn't something on the drawing board? Cause from this behavioural approach the mechanisms follow a challenge (as opposed to a support) function. I know, the old fears pop up. Blue donut. But consider scarcity effects on economics of scale. It makes things blow up. It's why the very concept of proxy wars was invented by humans for crying out loud :P Why institutional corruption is a factor of both conflict and entropy. Need I go on? See how close you are with this concept, yet *just* that bit off?
And that's not just more fun and more activity without enforcing the same organisational behaviour on every existing niche big and small, it's also a lot healthier in terms of resource allocation. After all - with the caveat that you're not thinking about migration/depletion - you're just replacing one set of mechanical constraints with another on a larger scale. I know, no more legacy code issues. But it's still a trap of resource allocation and setting priorities for design down the road. While everybody behaves in accordance to fixed boundaries that do not change. Status quo.
There's a thing called dependancy management for geo-economics which interestingly is also present in group psychology (as well as other fields like political economics, geo-politics et alii). You're *this* close with this concept to applying that effectively, but if it isn't a full match, it only reinforces static consumption and control. So either something has to be added to the mix in order to put behavioural focus first, or we're back to migration/depletion.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services Singularity Syndicate
2121
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:16:50 -
[194] - Quote
Moons should be mineable anywhere but hisec (the Empires control those moons). If CCP want WH's to be different in moongoo terms make the detonated crusticles produce random elements in random yields, varied based upon WH class. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:19:07 -
[195] - Quote
Querns wrote: Moons will be "freed up" in the sense that it makes zero sense to pay fuel every month to hold a moon that you lack the manpower to exploit.
I remember that argument from several times over It never came to be. Humans and their behaviour, what can I say. Maybe it's time for an invasion of aliens - might be better odds at getting some common sense in this universe.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:23:38 -
[196] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Moons should be mineable anywhere but hisec (the Empires control those moons). If CCP want WH's to be different in moongoo terms make the detonated crusticles produce random elements in random yields, varied based upon WH class.
Careful, by that argument it would follow that players should be able to at some point strike deals with the empires for moon mining licenses - oh wait :P
It says a lot that CCP strongly considers keeping this concept out of highsec. It pretty much shows their expectations on function of these mechanisms as boundaries for set behaviour. Which as I explained earlier, is for this kind of model the incorrect order of things. Understandable, but it makes it a repeat application of something which has only ever reinforced status quo and the adoption of the same organisational models (plus n+1) everywhere.
The WH statement does sound interesting. Feels a bit like gas mining. |
Orakkus
Imperium Technologies DARKNESS.
338
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:29:24 -
[197] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote: Moons will be "freed up" in the sense that it makes zero sense to pay fuel every month to hold a moon that you lack the manpower to exploit.
I remember that argument from several times over It never came to be. Humans and their behaviour, what can I say. Maybe it's time for an invasion of aliens - might be better odds at getting some common sense in this universe.
Your previous post compared this to POSes, but I don't agree with that comparison. POSes required fuel, yes, but outside of that it is a passive isk generator that needs only a single person to maintain. This new system requires multiple people (and don't say bots, because this would be the perfect bot trap in CCP's mind) and there is only finite amount of time a single pilot can give. Not saying the smarter alliances won't find some way to mitigate or even find some financial advantage, but we can only speculate from what we know.
And so far, this would break up the stranglehold on a lot of moons.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo
320
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:35:34 -
[198] - Quote
"with prices between that of Engineering Complexes and Citadels" I had hoped this was not going to be the case.
So you've effectively taken booster production which can and is currently being done by small groups or individuals in a small-med POS (which can be both cheap and 'hidden' in all the POS trash of a system) and handed it over only to entities big enough to drop a defense fleet on a large open target. So just one more thing the new structures have taken away from the little guy. (And donGÇÖt say 'you can uses someone else's, no one in many lowsec regions lets anyone else manufacture in their Engineering Complex now, why would reactions be different).
I hope IGÇÖm wrong, but on the face of it you really seem to have managed to screw the small groups and solo players over with all the new Upwell structures (you know the exact thing you promised not to do when announcing them!). You've done nothing but increased the barrier to structure ownership with the new structures and have removed any intermediary steps in both production and ownership a small entity can take to work their way up in game. You've also managed to remove any niches a small group or solo people could previously use POS's to exploit to get ahead in production, staging logistics and even moon mining (especially in Lowsec for even medium sized entities). Look, I get why you did this, and I support quite a lot of it, but in your effort to 'fix' what you see as broken with large 0.0 entities you've thrown all the solo-20 man (or more) corps I know under your Upwell bus. I'm sure they will really enjoy the limited gameplay you've left them with in the future.
And why the mining ledger, shouldnGÇÖt you be allowing for lying, stealing and backstabbing? Oh and if your GÇ£ninja-miningGÇ¥ is being recored youGÇÖre not really a GÇ£ninjaGÇ¥ are you. It sounds like just another intel tool to prevent the little guy from working within the GÇÿcracksGÇÖ of the big guys. |
McBorsk
Multispace Technologies Inc Yulai Federation
68
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:36:08 -
[199] - Quote
Mining, really? |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1911
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:44:59 -
[200] - Quote
Moongoo represents the smallest part of our income for our alliance. Shifting it to be a group activity that others can come party crash is about as good as you can get in EVE. More things in space that go boom is always a good thing. We all abused the top down income stream for all of these years. Time to let bottom up income flourish even more than it already is.
Smaller entities will indeed have to adjust. Invite others to come mine and tax them. Shift to other income streams. Wail and gnash your teeth. The choice is yours.
Fun fact. We had been investing in this for years ahead of time on a personal and alliance level. I am pretty smug about the random Reddit post a while back showing a single spec can of mine that was full of goo. Checkmate.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Creator of Burn Jita
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:45:41 -
[201] - Quote
Orakkus wrote:SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote: Moons will be "freed up" in the sense that it makes zero sense to pay fuel every month to hold a moon that you lack the manpower to exploit.
I remember that argument from several times over It never came to be. Humans and their behaviour, what can I say. Maybe it's time for an invasion of aliens - might be better odds at getting some common sense in this universe. Your previous post compared this to POSes, but I don't agree with that comparison. POSes required fuel, yes, but outside of that it is a passive isk generator that needs only a single person to maintain. This new system requires multiple people (and don't say bots, because this would be the perfect bot trap in CCP's mind) and there is only finite amount of time a single pilot can give. Not saying the smarter alliances won't find some way to mitigate or even find some financial advantage, but we can only speculate from what we know. And so far, this would break up the stranglehold on a lot of moons.
Let me clarify, I'm not looking that much at the mechanics of an introduction like this. I'm looking at it from a behavioural angle. As CCP often mentions, the reason why EVE works is because it's essentially an emergent dynamic - a closed environment where behaviour dictates function. Which is subtly but significantly different from a mechanical approach where behaviour follows form follows function.
Even just within a mechanical approach, the very same variables apply. Teamwork, resource requirements, risk assesments, combined use paths, and so forth. POS Moon Mining was actually once presented by a CCPian as bot proof. Well ... *cough*
It's a design/development challenge either way, they need to introduce mechanisms that follow behavioural options and choices, while also subtly guiding those - and sometimes providing boundaries. The mechanical approach however is always in line with EVE's fundamentel model of functional dependancies, and as such vulnerable to us players going apeshit as usual. Economics of scale applies, N+1 applies, and there's the very same behavioural effects which we've seen demonstrated as being negative (even unhealthy) like enforcing the same organisational models on all (regardless of niche of play) and the pitfalls of grind.
As I said, they're incredibly close to something which would avoid the known stumbling blocks - no pun intended :P From a des/dev angle this mechanical approach comes extremely close to a functional behavioural model. But because it just misses that mark, the consequences may be nice in the statistical reporting and analysis, but the behavioural effects are the same as before/current. Thus making this a matter of resource allocation to realistically achieve only a short term effect.
Lowsec will be affected by this, absolutely. As a composite niche of play the stimuli generated by the current form of this concept can only reinforce the pattern where organisational states of null sec are copied - or where local dynamics are replaced by the proverbial long arms of null sec (in a very similar manner to what I predicted to follow when citadels were introduced for hub behaviour, see Perimeter, Amarr, etc, which are increasingly subject to those patterns).
Null won't really be affected. The organisational and behavioural models there can easily cope with the mechanical changes. Expensive, sure. Does it require much adaptation? Not really. In terms of behaviour itself it only reinforces status quo. Yes, it creates room/incentive for more population, but no realistic triggers for behaviour that instigates dynamic shifts. Nice for the young kids now to have a future mining in null, nice for taxes, but it's the same pattern as when pos based moon mining made its shift from private to corp to alliance use.
Highsec is a non-factor, as it appears. Which more or less makes sense really. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:59:50 -
[202] - Quote
Aryth wrote:Moongoo represents the smallest part of our income for our alliance. Shifting it to be a group activity that others can come party crash is about as good as you can get in EVE. More things in space that go boom is always a good thing. We all abused the top down income stream for all of these years. Time to let bottom up income flourish even more than it already is.
Smaller entities will indeed have to adjust. Invite others to come mine and tax them. Shift to other income streams. Wail and gnash your teeth. The choice is yours.
Yes, but I presume you can see how this concept creates so called expanded boundaries for geo-demographical growth. The teamwork dependancies require applying a uniform approach towards resource consumption - we're humans, we go min/max and n+1.
It'll create a pull factor for higher population. Not a big one, but scale applies, so add taxes and you have one hell of an added cow to milk. I can completely understand why many groups like the very idea, because it's easy to use the way we're used to.
Whether that is really healthy in the long run, well, that is a question. I do think it is fair to say that creating systems which either allow for or cause CCP to only look back years later hasn't exactly had great precedents. To say the least.
I can understand some of the comments from low sec groups here. In a way some of them are very much in tune with both behaviour and dependancy of specialisation present throughout EVE. They see that they will have to adopt organisational models, as well as behaviour which is pretty much the same as what we know from null. It kinda makes sense for them to not be too thrilled this way.
They too get a theoretical bonus potential similar to null in terms of pull factor for demographics - yet it still is lowsec. We can't compare that environment really with null or high, thus we can't really think it would be "ok" to have them magically end up the same as null groups that scale. If anything, and I think - I forget the alt name - Helen who's Eve's first ever Aeon got splashed in the drones once upon a time in ancient times - made a very good point. Even if those niche groups follow function, they will still become just short term targets much the same way as the current market hub citadels - an arena which they can't match.
The intended consequences by CCP are mostly clear, and in terms of shaking things up while also smoothing things out it isn't bad, it's actually very close to good. But in EVE it's always the effects and the long term that matters for health of the dynamic itself.
There's nothing wrong with adaptation. On the contrary, change is and should be the only constant. Question is, does this current concept really introduce change in its effects? Not really, it doesn't instigate new behaviour or diversity of / in behaviour, it stimulates adopting the same behaviour. And that, in the long run, creates the very same problems which POS also created over time. Which is kinda frustrating, because CCP got really close with this concept. It's a bit of irony that many years ago they disproved player suggest concepts which were exactly the same as this CCP introduced concept on this very reasoning. Yet now this appears a little forgotten. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:05:09 -
[203] - Quote
There are two issues at play here.
Moon Mining
Reactions and t2 production...
Agreed, moon mining is very passive income. As much as I hate the thought of introducing serious mining into t2 production, I can see where the thought is coming from. This might also equalize prices across moons, as r16 and r8 mats might actually be in demand owing to labor shortages.
I still think the concept of generating "content" by forcing relatively defenseless ships to sit at a known area at a specified time is very lacking, but that's what we have with entosising and the nerf of off grid boosts.
There's two types pvp... pvp for fun, which industrialists don't generally revel in, and there's pvp to save your system, structures, sov, etc. Industrialists and political powers will fight and finance to the death if only to keep from having to redo their spreadsheets. To my mind, that's real content, but to each his own. With asset safety, a lot of content has been reduced to miner tackled, save or don't save him.
Reacting is not really passive income, requiring substantial logistics, daily maintenance, upkeep of cyno and trade alts, and active regional defense. Until now, it was essentially separate from typical t2 production with the vast majority of t2 builders beginning at finished reactions or even components. It is, however, a living a determined spreadsheeter could achieve largely on one toon if part of a cooperative alliance.
Moving reactions into the industry UI really turns it into T1 production. You've just added a new class of asteroids and two entirely redundant steps to the typical process. Instead of reaction - component - ship, it's first level reaction, final reaction, components, ships.
This reduces the complexity of t2 production and increases the redundancy and tedium... more flavors of asteroids/minerals, more steps in process, but no unique process, substantive investment, or expertise... just a skill and a citadel. It's akin to mining relic sites for relic dust that a 5M bpo turns into ancient salvage.
If it made any sense to me, I'd try to be on board.
When did I miss the outcry about there not being enough mining required in Eve? Who has been begging for more 80Msp proteus vs 6m sp npc corp mining alt "rich content" pvp?
Who has been clamoring for redundancy in t2 production?
I'm serious, someone please explain to me, like I'm an idiot, what the point is. I keep expecting CCP to evemail me explaining how they've totally reconsidered given all my excellent insights, but so far, nuthin.. lol
|
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
129
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:06:31 -
[204] - Quote
WTF is Fozzie doing.
You do realise this is a game right? You do realise people sign in to escape horrible ******* mudane interactions with work, wives and kids....
**** this game I so looking forward to this and left incredibly disappointed. Your also feeding the ******* goats in high sec who can IsBox the hell out of their clients and make easy quick risk free wins. Let's all just be ******* gankers. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2761
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:16:05 -
[205] - Quote
Hilti Enaka wrote:WTF is Fozzie doing.
You do realise this is a game right? You do realise people sign in to escape horrible ******* mudane interactions with work, wives and kids....
**** this game I so looking forward to this and left incredibly disappointed. Your also feeding the ******* goats in high sec who can IsBox the hell out of their clients and make easy quick risk free wins. Let's all just be ******* gankers.
You do realize that none of the mining stuff in this devblog is going to be in highsec, right? All highsec gets from this is a reprocessing structure.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Jonathon Silence
Celestial Horizon Corp. Badfellas Inc.
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:20:22 -
[206] - Quote
Does this mean that moon 'content' will be scaled like planets.
So a moon might have variable amounts of a resource in it?
Does this mean that CCP could potentially add small amounts of R64 (and other types) ore to other moons?
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:20:54 -
[207] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:There are two issues at play here.
Moon Mining
Reactions and t2 production...
Agreed, moon mining is very passive income. As much as I hate the thought of introducing serious mining into t2 production, I can see where the thought is coming from. This might also equalize prices across moons, as r16 and r8 mats might actually be in demand owing to labor shortages.
I still think the concept of generating "content" by forcing relatively defenseless ships to sit at a known area at a specified time is very lacking, but that's what we have with entosising and the nerf of off grid boosts.
There's two types pvp... pvp for fun, which industrialists don't generally revel in, and there's pvp to save your system, structures, sov, etc. Industrialists and political powers will fight and finance to the death if only to keep from having to redo their spreadsheets. To my mind, that's real content, but to each his own. With asset safety, a lot of content has been reduced to miner tackled, save or don't save him.
Reacting is not really passive income, requiring substantial logistics, daily maintenance, upkeep of cyno and trade alts, and active regional defense. Until now, it was essentially separate from typical t2 production with the vast majority of t2 builders beginning at finished reactions or even components. It is, however, a living a determined spreadsheeter could achieve largely on one toon if part of a cooperative alliance.
Moving reactions into the industry UI really turns it into T1 production. You've just added a new class of asteroids and two entirely redundant steps to the typical process. Instead of reaction - component - ship, it's first level reaction, final reaction, components, ships.
This reduces the complexity of t2 production and increases the redundancy and tedium... more flavors of asteroids/minerals, more steps in process, but no unique process, substantive investment, or expertise... just a skill and a citadel. It's akin to mining relic sites for relic dust that a 5M bpo turns into ancient salvage.
If it made any sense to me, I'd try to be on board.
When did I miss the outcry about there not being enough mining required in Eve? Who has been begging for more 80Msp proteus vs 6m sp npc corp mining alt "rich content" pvp?
Who has been clamoring for redundancy in t2 production?
I'm serious, someone please explain to me, like I'm an idiot, what the point is. I keep expecting CCP to evemail me explaining how they've totally reconsidered given all my excellent insights, but so far, nuthin.. lol
The first bit, it's a classic terminology or language problem. Different perspectives use different terms and focus on different reception of those. While many players may or may not just assume things, I don't think CCP does. At least not anymore.
In regards to the second bit, that's classic cui bono. Who benefits. Combine that with how CCP approaches the statistics of health, and what their prime instrument of feedback tests is.
And yes, I agree that none of this is really new, it's just replacement mechanisms without instigating functional change. It's a big thing, but it is symbolic in its replacement of current affairs - at least with this concept "as is".
Incidentally, mining for mysterious reasons remains popular throughout the ages. I suppose it's a bit like being able to be in space, flying your own ship, but when the wife or kid or homework calls you can step out. It's accessible, low key participation, easy consumption. Ideal to build upon for a growing population which in broad terms does not go as deep as - for example - high level player groups or EVE junkies. I get why mining is an obvious thing to look at for CCP. I would wager that in all the surveys they've had quite a bit of interesting responses in the line of "do not change mining zomg".
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:21:44 -
[208] - Quote
Querns wrote:Hilti Enaka wrote:WTF is Fozzie doing.
You do realise this is a game right? You do realise people sign in to escape horrible ******* mudane interactions with work, wives and kids....
**** this game I so looking forward to this and left incredibly disappointed. Your also feeding the ******* goats in high sec who can IsBox the hell out of their clients and make easy quick risk free wins. Let's all just be ******* gankers. You do realize that none of the mining stuff in this devblog is going to be in highsec, right? All highsec gets from this is a reprocessing structure.
And just maybe, compression tax That's a nice bone to throw, no? |
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:24:23 -
[209] - Quote
Wow CCP - this is one of the MOST AWESOME change you will ever do in this game. Should do this ages ago... |
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:32:53 -
[210] - Quote
Make it so they can fit 2 or more rigs for refining. I have always thought the High sec/low sec limitation on either or was silly. Itll be extra silly with these new structures. Otherwise they sound great :) |
|
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
129
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:33:45 -
[211] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:There are two issues at play here.
Moon Mining
Reactions and t2 production...
Agreed, moon mining is very passive income. As much as I hate the thought of introducing serious mining into t2 production, I can see where the thought is coming from. This might also equalize prices across moons, as r16 and r8 mats might actually be in demand owing to labor shortages.
I still think the concept of generating "content" by forcing relatively defenseless ships to sit at a known area at a specified time is very lacking, but that's what we have with entosising and the nerf of off grid boosts.
There's two types pvp... pvp for fun, which industrialists don't generally revel in, and there's pvp to save your system, structures, sov, etc. Industrialists and political powers will fight and finance to the death if only to keep from having to redo their spreadsheets. To my mind, that's real content, but to each his own. With asset safety, a lot of content has been reduced to miner tackled, save or don't save him.
Reacting is not really passive income, requiring substantial logistics, daily maintenance, upkeep of cyno and trade alts, and active regional defense. Until now, it was essentially separate from typical t2 production with the vast majority of t2 builders beginning at finished reactions or even components. It is, however, a living a determined spreadsheeter could achieve largely on one toon if part of a cooperative alliance.
Moving reactions into the industry UI really turns it into T1 production. You've just added a new class of asteroids and two entirely redundant steps to the typical process. Instead of reaction - component - ship, it's first level reaction, final reaction, components, ships.
This reduces the complexity of t2 production and increases the redundancy and tedium... more flavors of asteroids/minerals, more steps in process, but no unique process, substantive investment, or expertise... just a skill and a citadel. It's akin to mining relic sites for relic dust that a 5M bpo turns into ancient salvage.
If it made any sense to me, I'd try to be on board.
When did I miss the outcry about there not being enough mining required in Eve? Who has been begging for more 80Msp proteus vs 6m sp npc corp mining alt "rich content" pvp?
Who has been clamoring for redundancy in t2 production?
I'm serious, someone please explain to me, like I'm an idiot, what the point is. I keep expecting CCP to evemail me explaining how they've totally reconsidered given all my excellent insights, but so far, nuthin.. lol
Absolutely hit the head on the nail with this.
|
Mephiztopheleze
Laphroaig Inc.
1259
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:46:38 -
[212] - Quote
If you're still not going to allow us to extract moon goo in J-Space, perhaps you might consider a different mechanic for us fringe dwellers.
Instead of breaking off a chunk of moon that contains moon goo, how about it breaks off a chunk of moon that then spawns a regular Ore Anomaly or even an Ice or Gas Site in the hole? The longer the fracking process, the *better* the ore/gas/ice site spawned?
Or just give us regular Asteroid Belts in wormholes.....
Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze
This is my Forum Main. My Combat Alt is sambo Inkura
|
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 00:56:54 -
[213] - Quote
Saw some other responses and maybe this would be a good chance to GET RID OF THE MULTIPLE REACTIONS STEPS!!! Just change the tech 2 component bpos to use moon minerals.
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:14:12 -
[214] - Quote
Let's make the game even duller than it already is by now making people mine instead of PVP enjoying the beautiful parts of the game, instead treat eve like your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th job...
Well done Fozzie, you've delivered another smack into the community. The focus was how to make Moon Mining a more active activity. The best suggestion and the one most wanted was for moon minerals to be added to something that can be mined in asteroid belts and anoms. Not this BS that also affects a fairly active profession in creating t2 material already. t2 prices are going to sore because of it and with the introduction of Alpha's i see a mass amount of people saying to the hell with it.
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:22:17 -
[215] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Let's make the game even duller than it already is by now making people mine instead of PVP enjoying the beautiful parts of the game, instead treat eve like your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th job...
Well done Fozzie, you've delivered another smack into the community. The focus was how to make Moon Mining a more active activity. The best suggestion and the one most wanted was for moon minerals to be added to something that can be mined in asteroid belts and anoms. Not this BS that also affects a fairly active profession in creating t2 material already. t2 prices are going to sore because of it and with the introduction of Alpha's i see a mass amount of people saying to the hell with it.
I was thinking about that. They cant possibly think that the T2 mats will be even remotely reasonable.. |
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:33:07 -
[216] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Let's make the game even duller than it already is by now making people mine instead of PVP enjoying the beautiful parts of the game, instead treat eve like your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th job...
Well done Fozzie, you've delivered another smack into the community. The focus was how to make Moon Mining a more active activity. The best suggestion and the one most wanted was for moon minerals to be added to something that can be mined in asteroid belts and anoms. Not this BS that also affects a fairly active profession in creating t2 material already. t2 prices are going to sore because of it and with the introduction of Alpha's i see a mass amount of people saying to the hell with it.
I was thinking about that. They cant possibly think that the T2 mats will be even remotely reasonable..
I can't actually believe this has been proposed. You can't change gamer mentality and if adding additional brain numbing resource collecting is the best Fozzie has then I have no confidence in the devs of this company. |
TravellerDEP
Department of Defence Brotherhood of Spacers
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:35:35 -
[217] - Quote
We had a saying when I was in the service, KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid. What the heck is this?? Maybe you should talk to some engineers about how they would do things because this sure sounds like I have to sit somewhere with my thumb up my butt waiting for a timer to countdown. This is more or less a mining operation and if you look at any of the operations currently in existence there is a steady stream of materials being produced not a burst of materials then wait for days or weeks and then another burst. If you're trying to get more people involved in the process, sad news, you'll lose people because its sounding like it will be more difficult. There's enough people who don't like mining because its so mind numbingly boring, and you're creating something like that for moon harvesting, so you won't be getting people falling all over themselves to do it. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:40:49 -
[218] - Quote
MAYBE the goal is to entice hs miners to move/live in ls or nul w very lucrative mining work avail from established nul alliances desperate for labor?
I used to be one. the hs miner is a unique being. I don't see them embracing api's, voice coms, and four third party apps so they can be treated like shi* in nul and have to beg for help importing basic fits.
Big deal nul miners are generally cap builders with little interest in moon goo (since the only t2 caps are jf's which can only be built at a loss.. lol) They enjoy building large ships and aren't as motivated by pure isk per hour, or they'd never mine spod or gneiss.
I'm a younger toon, so feel free to correct me, but I thought the understanding was wh's best or t3... sov nul best or t2 and caps... hs best for finance, logistics, missioning and very casual play.
Just don't believe there are, or can be, enough pure isk/hr miners able or willing to live in nul for t2 to cost less than deadspace faction |
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:45:53 -
[219] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Let's make the game even duller than it already is by now making people mine instead of PVP enjoying the beautiful parts of the game, instead treat eve like your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th job...
no no no no no men no. You will se what happend to your all moons on lowsec after this ahahahah |
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:47:21 -
[220] - Quote
This suggestion doesn't even come close to gaming style and personas. Do some research and you'll see people who play MMORGP's want to do things solo and in small groups... When will Fozzie learn this? |
|
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:56:47 -
[221] - Quote
yes it will be very enjoyable stiling moon goo from pandemic. very,.. very... people generaly love you guys |
Edek Hawker
Serpent Sun Roadhouse Regulars
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 02:05:57 -
[222] - Quote
Sassums wrote:So if I am reading this correctly you are continuing to cater to the null sec folks while WH people receive no love.
T3 was our only production option in WH space that didnt require us to leave the WH to produce - with gas reaction BPO's requiring Ice products we will now either have to go out to HS to purchase said ice or roll until we find a shattered that has ice belts (that will almost always guarantee a gank)
T3 Production should continue to be a W-Space product and should not require K-Space components.
If this is changing then W-Space should be allowed to harvest resources from the moons of the systems we inhabit.
If not - remove the stupid ice requirement from T3 reactions.
HEAR! HEAR! Though unlike a lot of other wormholers I could care less about moon harvesting if its a null sec/low sec niche that is fine let it be I personally have no problem with NOT being able to mine moon goo in w-space. Now about adding ice products to T3 reactions.. T3 production is w-spaces niche either 1) Don't mess with it leave out the ice products and let things stand as they are OR 2) Add ice field ore anomolies to EVERY w-space system's randomizer for anomolies to appear For the Gent above is correct in that having to roll a connection for a shattered WH is ridiculous and even if you do find one mining ice there is a gank fest waiting to happen. It will be much more secure to be able to mine ice in your home system. I'm not a whiner and I'm happy to work with the upcoming changes just please use a little common sense when making production requirement changes to T3 manufacturing. T3 production is already a high end product with a high skill set requirement both to manufacture and fly them. They have a decently high price tag to go with them. Lets not make them ridiculously hard to produce from homegrown materials per say. Niches are good from the business perspective, The T3 production and trade actually encourages W-space to interact with K-space for I have to get my finished product to market if I can't finish my product in w-space or it takes longer to make in in w-space then It will be longer until I go to k-space. |
Esnaf Origin
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 02:46:14 -
[223] - Quote
A quick fix for "dead" lowsec/hisec/whateversec.
Make that there are different materials/minerals/moongoo obtainable from exploring/mining/drilling in highsec/lowsec/nullsec. Make that there is demand for all of those materials - as the production of different items need a bit of materials from all kind of security space.
An example:
There is some great ship that can be build from many different components. 10% are components from highsec exploration 10% are components from lowsec exploration 10% are components from nullsec exploration 10% are components from wh exploration 10% are components from highsec mining 10% are components from lowsec mining 10% are components from nullsec mining 10% are components from wh mining 10% are components from lowsec moon drilling 10% are components from nullsec moon drilling
etc.
You can't get any of the components from for example lowsec mining from mining in null/highsec, only from lowsec. Same for all the other combination.
So whenever there is high supply of some mats (for example null moons/rorquals mining, highsec mining etc) the prices for related mats will get low and ppl will slowly shift into other activities/security space. Whenever there is low supply (lowsec moon drilling, mining, wh exploration etc) prices for related mats will be get high and more ppl will perform that activity in that security space. Market will regulate it, without making some security space sectors artificialy better than the rest.
Of course, the harder to live in some space, the riskier it is to operate there, the less ppl will be able to perform those activities there and the prices will be higher.
That will fix the problem of "dead" lowsec and the problem of very rewarding nullsec regions, where it's currently safer to live, rat and mine than in hisec. |
FeMalogalotalotim
Renegade Stars The Eclipse.
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 02:47:41 -
[224] - Quote
Quote: The Mining Ledger
With all this new activity around the moons of New Eden, the corporations claiming the moons will need new tools for tracking whatGÇÖs going on in their territory. The mining ledger is the new open-ended tool for Refinery owners to keep track of who is mining in their belt.
Remove that **** option and it will be ok i think. Otherwise all the big alliances will simply use smaller players to make money for them, i.e. more money and less work. |
Locke Beulve
Serpent Sun Roadhouse Regulars
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 03:10:30 -
[225] - Quote
Quote:Refineries will also bring changes to the system for reacting moon materials and gasses into more advanced materials. Reactions are a key part of the resource processing chain for Tech-2 items, Tech-3 ships, and boosters, and we believe that the current reaction system using starbases has a lot of room to improve in user experience and quality of life.
Concur with this.
Quote:The existing reactions will be converted to new blueprints that enable the reaction process in the new system, and new reactions will include small amounts of ice products in each run to compensate for the lower number of starbase towers needed for advanced industry.
Whoaaaaaa there. Already ice products are required to be used to fuel these structures, which makes use of ice mats. There's no need to go overboard and make the fuel block prices skyrocket even more then they already are from shortages of Strontium. There is huge potential for these new structures, but lets not reinvent the wheel here. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 03:23:48 -
[226] - Quote
Querns wrote:Leo Augustus wrote:Moons won't be "freed up." It's just more tedium to extract the goodies.
Anyone planning on taking a fleet of hulks into PL space to mine under their cit's guns, nm their fleet?
Sign me up for that.. lol.
Moons will be "freed up" in the sense that it makes zero sense to pay fuel every month to hold a moon that you lack the manpower to exploit.
We have hostile cits and pos's dropped in our space simply to generate content on the off chance that the deploying force has the peeps online to defend. Often they don't and it dies without a fight. I wouldn't count on rational thought dictating behavior |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 03:57:31 -
[227] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Duh, I thought this was pretty clear already. Doesn't take a genius, EVE has experience with the introduction of this kind of systemic mechanisms with origins in mechanical (as opposed to behavoural) focus. It's an exact repeat of the POS Moon Mining introduction once upon a time.
I wasn't looking for your confirmation of me being a genius, which I naturally wouldn't do, be it only for the reason that I doubt you could see one if you met one. To be blunt, I don't like your smug way of telling CCP "you are almost there" while basically taking over other peoples arguments and blunting them by mixing them with some text-book 2nd year undergraduate psychological system and game theory boredom, which you obviously are able to repeat, but don't seem to understand. Otherwise you'd be able to either condense your very simple thoughts into a simple "yep, bla" or be able to bring something deeper into the discussion than generalized talk about form, function, behaviour and structure. Don't get me wrong here: I think using theory can be an important part of understanding what we need in this game. But for this to work you actually need to be able to apply theory and not merely repeat the words you've learnt somewhere and trying to push your very basic understanding of a few things over the complex social world that EVE is after all, like some clowns mask over a face. If that is your personal need to give yourself the feeling to grasp EVE in some way, so be it. I will read your postings and I will think my part about this wannabe intellectual try hard posture. But please, don't be so smug - and I happily repeat myself - to tell CCP "you are almost there" as if you would understand any of it.
So kindly take your "Duh" and smear it into your hair. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2762
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:14:37 -
[228] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:Querns wrote:Leo Augustus wrote:Moons won't be "freed up." It's just more tedium to extract the goodies.
Anyone planning on taking a fleet of hulks into PL space to mine under their cit's guns, nm their fleet?
Sign me up for that.. lol.
Moons will be "freed up" in the sense that it makes zero sense to pay fuel every month to hold a moon that you lack the manpower to exploit. We have hostile cits and pos's dropped in our space simply to generate content on the off chance that the deploying force has the peeps online to defend. Often they don't and it dies without a fight. I wouldn't count on rational thought dictating behavior
Sure, dropping the odd structure to provoke folks is one thing, but the idea that we or PL or anyone would simply drop structures on every money moon, especially outside our/their immediate tantrum radius, for no gain, is simply absurd. That shit costs money.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising The Bastion
68
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:15:17 -
[229] - Quote
Locke Beulve wrote:Quote:The existing reactions will be converted to new blueprints that enable the reaction process in the new system, and new reactions will include small amounts of ice products in each run to compensate for the lower number of starbase towers needed for advanced industry. Whoaaaaaa there. Already ice products are required to be used to fuel these structures, which makes use of ice mats. There's no need to go overboard and make the fuel block prices skyrocket even more then they already are from shortages of Strontium. There is huge potential for these new structures, but lets not reinvent the wheel here.
This will be absolutely necessary. You can now essentially do ALL of your reactions in a single structure. Without this a huge portion of the isotope demand in the game would die as one of the single largest consumers of isotopes is reaction farms.
CSM XI Member
Twitter: Sullen_Decimus
Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus
Sullen Decimus for CSM XII
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2762
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:15:42 -
[230] - Quote
FeMalogalotalotim wrote:Quote: The Mining Ledger
With all this new activity around the moons of New Eden, the corporations claiming the moons will need new tools for tracking whatGÇÖs going on in their territory. The mining ledger is the new open-ended tool for Refinery owners to keep track of who is mining in their belt. Remove that **** option and it will be ok i think. Otherwise all the big alliances will simply use smaller players to make money for them, i.e. more money and less work.
Not going to happen. In order to make it worthwhile to actually drop these things, tracking is needed.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2762
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:16:44 -
[231] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Let's make the game even duller than it already is by now making people mine instead of PVP enjoying the beautiful parts of the game, instead treat eve like your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th job...
So don't mine if you don't want to mine?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2762
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:18:25 -
[232] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:This suggestion doesn't even come close to gaming style and personas. Do some research and you'll see people who play MMORGP's want to do things solo and in small groups... When will Fozzie learn this?
I am pretty sure you can mine in small groups. You can also shoot miners in small groups.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
LTC Vuvovich
Schwarze Korsaren Darwinism.
53
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:23:18 -
[233] - Quote
Hello Everyone,
My optimism upon reading this blog on Refineries could only be described as a 'mixed bag' ... maybe good and maybe not. What I fear most is that the structure will not even come CLOSE to fulfilling it's greatest potential. So with that having been said... I'd like to make a few suggestions in earnest.
1. The new Upwell Refinery Structure should have the capability of producing system wide mining bonuses (like Rorquals and Orcas used to do).
a. One possible benefit this could have obviously, is eliminating but not replacing 3 different 'boosting' vessels ( namely Rorquals, Orcas, and Porpoises). This would be extremely beneficial to Corporations/Alliances that routinely conduct larger scale mining ops and it would almost certainly streamline things logistically speaking for sure.
b. Lets say for instance a Medium Refinery is given mining bonuses commensurate with Orcas and a Large Refinery is likened to Rorqual bonuses. Both can be achieved through the proper creation and utilization of M-Standup and L-Standup refinery modules. As these new structures are intended to be geared toward the Industrial way of life... they should already include reprocessing and compression as standard features much like the automatic transmission is put in nearly every car and truck that is built on the planet Earth.
c. If the new refinery structure is going to be of any real use to miners in the same manner by which I am suggesting... it must also have the capability of handling Fleet/Wing/Squad command structures. The 'new' refinery structure should include a newly devised Standup module that would receive and re-transmit signals from the Mining Foreman Mindlink implant set and I believe this 'new' Standup module should give the structure owner the ability to allow or disallow this role/permission much the same way access to the station is granted.
2. Create a 'new' Mining Industrial Ship to haul what the Rorqual, Orca, and Porpoise does now. The only class of ships in the Eve Items Database that has not had a major overhaul or revamp are the Industrials. Give it some decent cargo capacity - somewhere between what Freighters and Jump Freighters haul but with a tad more speed outright or by use of low slots or both...!!! : )
3. I hope CCP that you will seriously consider making the new refinery structure WORTHY of its POTENTIAL, its ownership and subsequent deployments. Citadels are a dime a dozen... seems like everybody has one so what. A structure devised like what I am suggesting would be a crown's jewel in any Corporation's or Alliance 's portfolio... give the damn thing some real gusto, give it something really worthy of being both attacked and defended, but it needs its drawbacks as well. I would not recommend making them so easily available. A structure such as this... should require some pretty heavy duty operating costs to go along with it. |
Ukiah Spyker
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:26:20 -
[234] - Quote
Will you remove POS's when reactions and moon mining are implemented? How much time do I have or should I just assume this is ready to go now? I figure if I take my POS's down now, I might recover the 5 Billion I just spent on setting up two reaction towers, but if I wait, I'll have to write off the ivnestment as a total loss. |
FeMalogalotalotim
Renegade Stars The Eclipse.
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:31:52 -
[235] - Quote
Querns wrote:FeMalogalotalotim wrote:Quote: The Mining Ledger
With all this new activity around the moons of New Eden, the corporations claiming the moons will need new tools for tracking whatGÇÖs going on in their territory. The mining ledger is the new open-ended tool for Refinery owners to keep track of who is mining in their belt. Remove that **** option and it will be ok i think. Otherwise all the big alliances will simply use smaller players to make money for them, i.e. more money and less work. Not going to happen. In order to make it worthwhile to actually drop these things, tracking is needed.
Ofcouse its not going to happen because not only goon but all alliance want to HAVE control and get funded by doing nothing. Or u want to tell me that Goons/whoever are going to go mine in system where they dont have presence and only got the sov? :) I dont think so.... |
Nerriana
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 04:53:37 -
[236] - Quote
The Idea for "mining ledger" sounds like far too much automated intel for big blocks. Where is the commitment to deliberately allowing scamming, stealing and other shenanigans?
Making it possible for dishonest miners and/or mining coordinators to skim a bit is not a bug, it's a feature on EvE. What we really do not need is an automated bookkeeping system for big alliances to "big brother" their serfs.
Likewise, we don't want an automated system to monitor resources (what spontaneously-disintegrating moon goo field would be) so that aforementioned big alliances can know exactly who ninja-mined their semi-abandoned resources. This monitoring could become a seed for OTEC cartel 2.0, with big alliances more concerned of preventing protecting and exploiting their chokehold on critical materials.
On same vein the sizes of spawned moongoo-asteroids and the amount of moongoo they contain should be somewhat randomized. I know this would be a change from current steady-flow moon mining, but see above regarding opportunities for skimming.
Otherwise the idea sounds an improvement for current moon mining situation. |
Delekon
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
36
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 05:05:51 -
[237] - Quote
Things to put into WH moons: better ore than belts, ice, wh gas.
This is a nice mechanic and i think it can be implemented to whspace providedbit does not yield T2 stuff. |
Proteus Smith
Operation WormBear Absence of Light
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 05:40:31 -
[238] - Quote
Personally speaking, I kind of like the idea that CCP is making heavily passive parts of the game more active. I think that this will create all new kinds of social dynamics and ways to play the game. That said, I feel that there will need to be an increase in the output of any given moon's overall yield per month, due to the high likelihood of harassment from external (and some internal) sources that will curtail the amount of moongoo successfully harvested and retrieved by the corp owning the refinery. This will encourage corps and alliances to find better ways to manage their moons and even create more PvE and PvP content, perhaps by baiting enemies with juicy mining barges.
In regards to what the moons will generate, I don't see much of a reason for the moons of nullsec and lowsec to change at all. It seems to have done well this far anyways. But when it comes to the moons of highsec and wormholes, I feel that there should be a different type of extracted item for players to collect to help keep the economy healthy, and still provide an opportunity for players in those systems to play with these features. I think that the old "Alloys and Compounds" could make a strong comeback in these areas. Obviously each moon should only be able to provide certain types of these items, and in different amounts depending on system stats. Of course these moons could also include more standard ores and ices, at the CCP's discretion.
But that's just my two cents. |
Yetimal Mallet
DA WRONG HOLE
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 05:52:27 -
[239] - Quote
So the structure such like Personal hangar array will desapear ?
and i guess u cannot solo kill a dread with a reffineries... and the moon goo is now activ isk ?
that a violent change... |
Ukiah Spyker
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 06:01:43 -
[240] - Quote
Proteus Smith wrote: Personally speaking, I kind of like the idea that CCP is making heavily passive parts of the game more active. I think that this will create all new kinds of social dynamics and ways to play the game. That said, I feel that there will need to be an increase in the output of any given moon's overall yield per month, due to the high likelihood of harassment from external (and some internal) sources that will curtail the amount of moongoo successfully harvested and retrieved by the corp owning the refinery. This will encourage corps and alliances to find better ways to manage their moons and even create more PvE and PvP content, perhaps by baiting enemies with juicy mining barges.
In regards to what the moons will generate, I don't see much of a reason for the moons of nullsec and lowsec to change at all. It seems to have done well this far anyways. But when it comes to the moons of highsec and wormholes, I feel that there should be a different type of extracted item for players to collect to help keep the economy healthy, and still provide an opportunity for players in those systems to play with these features. I think that the old "Alloys and Compounds" could make a strong comeback in these areas. Obviously each moon should only be able to provide certain types of these items, and in different amounts depending on system stats. Of course these moons could also include more standard ores and ices, at the CCP's discretion.
But that's just my two cents.
It may already be the case, but it would be an interesting twist to the game to set up the production chains such that you cannot run a Refinery or Moon Mining operation without a steady stream of WH materials. For example, the moon blasting operation might require a special propellant material that can only be obtained from WH asteriod belts or gas clouds. Doing this would require the major NullSec corps to interact with WH corps. Currently these seem to be two disparate groups with their own flavor of SOV, and WH corps are already dependent on Null Sec corps as they cannot build T2 ships or modules (which are required for WH security) without Null Sec support. This could eithe create significant content as NullSec corps would now be required to constantly scan for wormholes and then "mine" in them, or pay a significant tax to WH SOV alliances who could use the revenue to take control of Null Sec moons. |
|
Bussan
Kabukicho
27
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:16:12 -
[241] - Quote
The new moon mining system sounds interesting and fun, but there will be some quite big problems about it...
The main one is that you move something from a completely automatic and unattended system to a very active one. It means that nearly all the moons that are haversted now, will become unused. Why? Because most of the moongoo is made from big alliances, whith hundreds of POSes around null. After the changes, they will only keep the most valuable ones, as much as they can actually keep mining every week (or whatever the settings will be). All the other moons will be freed. This will lead to a very big rebalance of T2 prices, as the available moongoo in the hubs will be a LOT less than now.
Moreover the basic system will remain the same... few big alliances will own 80% of the moongoo market (talking about value, not quantity).
In order to make things more interesting and open to as many players as possible, few changes would imho be important:
1. Every moon should have way more kinds of moongoo.
Maybe not all the kinds of moongoo, but something like the PI materials distribution on planets.... maybe keeping max 1 r64 per moon, 1-2 r32, and so on... and a total of 5-8 different types on every moon, The materials should be random, included the quantity, but could be tied to "moon type" and true sec. A little bit like the ore belts.
2. Open the moon mining to HS and WH.
In LS it's actually quite hard to mine... in Null the mined moons will be a lot less than now... and the alliances will focus on the best ones... So we will need a way to have enough low-end moongoo, not to completely crash the market. Following my suggestion #1, in HS it would be possible to mine mostly low-med end materials, with small quantities of higher ones. In WH it should be possible to get the same ones as in null... but most of the people living in WH won't mine them anyway. At least, having the chance of doing it would be an improvement to the gameplay, wouldn't ruin anything. And at least it would give some value for these structures in HS... the way they are now, they can only be used to refine ores. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
75
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:37:50 -
[242] - Quote
I have taken time to reflect on these changes.
More mining. Really?
Really, CCP?
You think the way to move the game forward is to spend vast numbers of man hours....... giving us more mining?
But it isn't really "more", is it? We don't get anything new out of this. No new ships. No new modules with new mechanics that effect combat.
It is a skin change on the already existing mining mechanic.
That's it.
That is, frankly, incredibly lazy and arrogant conduct by the directors responsible. If you turned in that kind of work, for that budget of time and treasure, at my company, I would sack you with no comment.
It is massive, open show of disrespect by the directors at CCP. they have stopped worked and downed tools.
The owner wants to sell and the directors have gone militant and downed tools.
Fascinating stuff.
|
twoflower Secret
Federation Star Invention
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:46:10 -
[243] - Quote
Hi
Can you please look into fuel costs of the Citadels, a alarmingly growing number of Citadels in hi-sec (no experiences in low/null-sec) is not fueled and thus necessary services are not available. In the region I travel more than 50% of the citadels seems not fuelled at all.
Giving the fuel costs Citadels seems like a big money pit for most smaller corporations (<10 member). Low or no tax to attract customers for a refinery does not make it any better for the competition.
Please do a count of how much of the cited 7800 corps have one or more Citadels with only the free services running (repair/insurance/storage/offices). |
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
721
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:08:24 -
[244] - Quote
twoflower Secret wrote:Hi
Can you please look into fuel costs of the Citadels, a alarmingly growing number of Citadels in hi-sec (no experiences in low/null-sec) is not fueled and thus necessary services are not available. In the region I travel more than 50% of the citadels seems not fuelled at all.
Giving the fuel costs Citadels seems like a big money pit for most smaller corporations (<10 member). Low or no tax to attract customers for a refinery does not make it any better for the competition.
Please do a count of how much of the cited 7800 corps have one or more Citadels with only the free services running (repair/insurance/storage/offices).
I fully agree, the one in my home system put up by a largish corp The Night Crew is now unfuelled so no processing or compression.
It was always going to come down to the cost, and if large corps and alliances are letting them go dormant then there's no hope whatsoever for the smaller guys, unless they want to buy a plex a month just to keep one running, with a reasonable chance of a wardec and it being hit as well.
Now they want more expensive targets in space, well at least they'll be mainly in null because for the life of me I can't see a role for them in HS.
As for the mechanics surrounding moon goo when these go live, yeah I can agree with that, it's about time the major null blocks had to do some work to collect the isk they are used to getting afk.
Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..."
" They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."
Welcome to EVE.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
727
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:08:53 -
[245] - Quote
1. About what amount of ISKs we are talking with passive moon mining here, from a single moon? I'm glad that passive income will go away (burn it with fire!) but judging from Rorqual thread changes, our min-max community with as little effort as possible, I presume negative reception. 2. Refineries will have mining bonuses (mining ledger, moon mining, refine bounses) what will driling platforms have? 3. I'm kinda lost when it comes to citadels. We will have specialized structures soon, what is the purpose of "Citadels" when more specialized EC, Refineries, Drilling platforms and more will come? 4. POS - remove? when? Outposts--->Citadels, POS--->? 5. Economy earthquake (passive gathering into active) and how to avoid it?
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
If you need a scout mail me.
|
Aspecter en Welle
Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire
186
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:41:51 -
[246] - Quote
1. We will mine new types of ore with Moon materials. Will reprocessing skills affect the efficiency of reprocessing this ore? 2. Can i compress new tupes of moon ore? 2.1 Can i compress moon ore on Upwell Refinery Complex? 3. BIGGEST BOOMS! Chunk of the moon Iwill be beautiful to blow up? 4. Blueprints. Do i need to reseach moon, polymer and booster reactions BPOs? 4.1 Price for reacion BPOs? 5. Moon ore will give only moon materials or normal minerals too? Tritanium maybe
ex-RusEVERadio leader
Ireland - terrorists and guiness. Iceland - ice and Eve
|
Alexander Bor
Polaris Global
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 09:13:53 -
[247] - Quote
Nice job CCP. It's funny to watch how mechanisms being implemented pull players in conflict LOL) |
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2107
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 09:52:53 -
[248] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:John McCreedy wrote:My initial thoughts on these proposed changes are that it penalises small, specialised corporations and alliances whilst simultaneously making a lot easier for the larger alliances with support networks, either rental alliances or diversified memberships. More money going to the select few which exacerbates the problems in Eve.
My corporation has a modest moon mining operation. It pays the bills and limited SRP for our members. We are not rich to begin with and, being specialised as PvP, make less per month than your average incursion runner makes in a day. Similarly, our Alliance isn't big. like us it's specialised along PvP lines. We don't have copious amounts of Titans, our R64s pay for a modest SRP programme to help everyone enjoy doing what they do.
We now need to diversify and find miners. Miners aren't going to mine for nothing so our already modest income is going to take a significant hit. It means we become less attractive for players than larger alliances whose income will barely be affected with this proposed change. If lots of small, independant alliances go under and all Eve is left with is large power blocs, then the game stagnates which not only does that undermine what the new sov attempted to achieve but how is it possibly going to be healthy for the game.
I understand what you're trying to achieve here and I'm fully onboard with having more people in space, it's what the game's desperately needed for years now, but that has to be balanced against the harm you're going to do to those who don't want to be part of major power blocs. You need to find some way to shift the balance of income so it's spread out more evenly across a more diverse player base rather than trying to force square pegs into round holes. My point exactly, but its downed out by the random 3 man groups who now are super excited about grabbing there 1 money moon, while med sized alliance die over funding because we cant chuck 3/4 of our member base into mining fleets. Like in real life: you must support any activity you do. Or you find someone who will be interested enough in you to support your activity.
Why you believe that you must be able to do what you like 'pvp' and evade all of the game outside?
I do pvp a little and i never ask for SRP. I support it with other means of making ISK.
This is pretty good change. Especially if all your 'pvp-only alliance supported by afk ISK" will adapt. That's what the game is about.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2107
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 09:57:26 -
[249] - Quote
Hoshi wrote:Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse? I do see a future where several of the large blocks like PL and Goons actively going around with their supers and killing drilling refineries just to stop others from gaining utilizing those moons that they don't want to use themselves. For some reason i think that they could do it already with POSes. But for some reason they do not ?
It's not that citadels are much easier to kill than POSes.
On the other hand POS does its job afk. You only visit it time by time to grab goo Active mining would be impossible far from your land. Thus many moons will be free.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Stella Southstar
Sagittarius Galactic Industries
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 10:21:49 -
[250] - Quote
Some ideas:
Divide moon elements per chunk of moon on a random basis with % probability skewed according to security, and drill times (size of the moon chunk)
So for example a null sec structure would get higher % chance for rare R64 whereas a Hisec structure would get a very very low chance to get R64 but could still happen in small quantities. Lowsec would sit some where in between.
These variables could be tweaked as required so as to not cause any upsets in the market.
Single moon asteroids would then yield a varied amount of elements in accordance to the probabilities above.
It would be nice to use moon probes to scan the moon after every cycle and redirect the beam to specific areas of the moon that are richer in one element as opposed to another. Similar to PI scanning at the moment.
The other variable is how long it would take to mine a complete field and the size of the field that is generated. Smaller chunks of moon should yield smaller fields which are faster to clear up but would give less possibility of getting rare elements.
Added thought:
I read in one of the comments before the idea of having automated bots/drones that can be enabled to mine. I don't think this is a good idea unless they are inefficient and could be siphoned. So an alliance/corp could allow automation but would get low yields and could leave the op open to be siphoned /attacked etc...
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services Singularity Syndicate
2121
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:04:44 -
[251] - Quote
Another concern I have:
How many of these structures do we see being destroyed to keep driving the market for production? I'm not thinking that big Null groups will be risking facilities on moons where there won't be enough miners to make it worthwhile, so there will be a finite number of moons populated with refineries. These will most likely be in pretty secure systems and therefore won't die very often.
It is unlikely that these structures will be operating in many other areas of space so I think it is a real concern that this will create a stagnant production market for these structures, whilst at the same time handing over pretty much all tech II materials production to null. |
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
441
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:06:25 -
[252] - Quote
So CCP: What stops me from anchoring, say, 5 refineries around a moon I want to keep? If you want it, you have to bash all 5 refineries, otherwise if you just bash the one with the drill I online my drill from another refinery before you get yours up. Oh, and their vuln hours are 1 hour apart to annoy you. It's going to be a huge pain to take that moon. Once I have it, if it's outside of my space there's not much I can do with it since I need people who will be willing to mine without backup. Mining ore worth twice as much isn't any good to me if I can't sell it because I die mining it. So I gain very little trying to push into someone else's space to get their moons. If you work really hard for little gain, you're going to be disincentivized to fight over moons. Why should we bother trying to take INIT moons if we get pretty much nothing out of it? Then we don't have epic battles with INIT, and that's bad.
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
D3athIsHere
Sector260
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:13:45 -
[253] - Quote
Quote:Each Refinery structure with an active moon drill will keep track of all the mining done in its associated belt, logging the character, corporation, ore type and amount mined. This will allow Refinery managers to share profits or request fees as they see fit, allow mining operations to more easily organize themselves, and allow corps and alliances to see who has been ninja-mining their fields without permission.
So ninja miners shall get found out and eventually killed off |
SonofSilence
Appetite 4 Destruction Appetite 4 Destruction.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:27:20 -
[254] - Quote
Since you took down my first post, I will repost.
CCP and Dev Team....QUIT GAYING UP EVE PLEASE. Thanks!
Get rid of plex and free to play.
EVE is supposed to be hard.
If you want easy, go play World of Warcraft. |
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1893
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:40:51 -
[255] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:So CCP: What stops me from anchoring, say, 5 refineries around a moon I want to keep? If you want it, you have to bash all 5 refineries, otherwise if you just bash the one with the drill I online my drill from another refinery before you get yours up. Oh, and their vuln hours are 1 hour apart to annoy you. It's going to be a huge pain to take that moon. Once I have it, if it's outside of my space there's not much I can do with it since I need people who will be willing to mine without backup. Mining ore worth twice as much isn't any good to me if I can't sell it because I die mining it. So I gain very little trying to push into someone else's space to get their moons. If you work really hard for little gain, you're going to be disincentivized to fight over moons. Why should we bother trying to take INIT moons if we get pretty much nothing out of it? Then we don't have epic battles with INIT, and that's bad.
This is honestly a valid concern that CCP needs to address.
It may limit the freedom we've had with these structures so far, but only one refinery should be allowed within drilling range at any given time (like POSes are now). Not doing so will create the above scenario with 500% accuracy. Because people WILL spam 10 refineries on a single R64 moon just to bore the enemy to death.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1893
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:42:58 -
[256] - Quote
SonofSilence wrote:Since you took down my first post, I will repost.
CCP and Dev Team....QUIT GAYING UP EVE PLEASE. Thanks!
Get rid of plex and free to play.
EVE is supposed to be hard.
If you want easy, go play World of Warcraft.
EVE is still the hardest game I know, and if you had any notion of business whatsoever you'd know that PLEX and Free to Play are what kept this game alive and will keep it alive for the coming years.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2766
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:43:21 -
[257] - Quote
SonofSilence wrote:Since you took down my first post, I will repost.
CCP and Dev Team....QUIT GAYING UP EVE PLEASE. Thanks!
Get rid of plex and free to play.
EVE is supposed to be hard.
If you want easy, go play World of Warcraft.
Ooh, I gotta know -- why should CCP get rid of PLEX? :allears:
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1893
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:55:12 -
[258] - Quote
Oh, not entirely unimportant.
Please tell me that Rorquals will be able to dock in the large refinery? Even if its the only capital ship that is able to dock there, surely a capital ship that is designed for resource gathering should be able to dock at a refinery. CCPlease.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
72
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 12:57:27 -
[259] - Quote
A few things that made me cringe while thinking about it:
It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances It might bring us back to renter times of 2013 just that renter pay with moongoo instead of ISK. - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Conclusion: It clearly favors large entities over small ones which is a step back considering Aegis Sov and Phoebe Jump Drives. A small entity might not even be ready to defend their citadel after breaking ore out of the moon for long enough to mine the ore. A buff of Nullsec automatically carries a Nerf to everyone else, except WH because they never had moonmining and WHs are already quite strong in terms of Risk vs. Reward.
In my opinion, you have to do a lot of designing work to do @CCP. I just hope it doesn't stay like this, because in that stae it would ruin the game for a lot of players.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:01:10 -
[260] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:Oh, not entirely unimportant.
Please tell me that Rorquals will be able to dock in the large refinery? Even if its the only capital ship that is able to dock there, surely a capital ship that is designed for resource gathering should be able to dock at a refinery. CCPlease.
Maybe at the large structures, definitely not at the medium ones. |
|
Ben Ishikela
84
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:09:38 -
[261] - Quote
Quote:Once the chunk of moon rock has completed its journey into space, the Refinery can use its drill module to detonate the chunk into a minable asteroid field. The exact time of the detonation is controlled by the owners of the Refinery within limits. If the chunk is left unattended long enough it will disintegrate into the asteroid field on its own. Why the delay? I feel, that the Owner already scheduled the date with the teamminingcrew. So there was already a decision. If formup is bad or enemy is prepared, why should this state of boredom be prolonged? If it was immediately detonated upon impact, there is going to be a time of clash possible. The exact time that can be read by all. Yes, ok. You might want to give the owner some feeling of power and control. But in the end the only decision that comes out of this particular mechanic is: Just do it Wait and go to bed late this night while not doing anything more meaningful in eve this session.
So CCPLEASE make it immediate!!!
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
|
Kynric
Sky Fighters
388
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:20:14 -
[262] - Quote
I like the concept as it places more ships in space. Why not extend it further and promote ships in wormhole space as well. The manufactured belt content need not be moon goo. In the wormhole context it could be a low sec grade ice or ore belt and it would still achieve that aim. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2767
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:29:39 -
[263] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote: It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now, in anticipation of this change. The signs have been there for years; you just have to think a little further out from where your next Level 5 mission or travelling supercap gank comes from.
From all the apoplectic posting here and from without, it seems like lowsec entities have the adaptability of my last bowel movement.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:33:43 -
[264] - Quote
Querns wrote:h4kun4 wrote: It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now, in anticipation of this change. The signs have been there for years; you just have to think a little further out from where your next Level 5 mission or travelling supercap gank comes from. From all the apoplectic posting here and from without, it seems like lowsec entities have the adaptability of my last bowel movement.
It raises an interesting set of questions. Adaptation and innovation are always a necessity - but is it healthy if every player dynamic falls within the same guiding paths and ends up adopting the same kind of organisational model. I'm not so sure whether the underlying issue with the low sec people's responses is the passive isk dependancy, there may very well be much more to it in terms of having to become something they never wanted to be. Deliberately so. Granted, this too is a topic of adapting to changes, but it is also a topic of niche gameplay and connected choices.
|
sgtdale
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:34:54 -
[265] - Quote
the end of the pos is near |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2768
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:45:02 -
[266] - Quote
sgtdale wrote:the end of the pos is near
hail satan
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Edek Hawker
Serpent Sun Roadhouse Regulars
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:48:48 -
[267] - Quote
Sullen Decimus wrote:Locke Beulve wrote:Quote:The existing reactions will be converted to new blueprints that enable the reaction process in the new system, and new reactions will include small amounts of ice products in each run to compensate for the lower number of starbase towers needed for advanced industry. Whoaaaaaa there. Already ice products are required to be used to fuel these structures, which makes use of ice mats. There's no need to go overboard and make the fuel block prices skyrocket even more then they already are from shortages of Strontium. There is huge potential for these new structures, but lets not reinvent the wheel here. This will be absolutely necessary. You can now essentially do ALL of your reactions in a single structure. Without this a huge portion of the isotope demand in the game would die as one of the single largest consumers of isotopes is reaction farms.
Why are we trying to keep the price of ice products artificially high? All of the new structures if fully fitted use more fuel blocks than the POS equivalent of them. If we finally get a structure that uses less fuel than the POS equivalent then its about time! If you continue to insist that we need to keep the status quo on ice production then look to booster charges ice products had their buff there. Last but not least If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :) |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2768
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:53:30 -
[268] - Quote
Edek Hawker wrote: If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :)
Considering T3 reactions burn ice in the form of POS fuel currently, no, there's no chance that it would be removed.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Dark Eulogy
Mortis Angelus Fidelas Constans
6
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:53:43 -
[269] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
Hi CCP
I want to first say I think the Player Owned Structures have been great so far and I look forward to their next installment, and that I think these are progressing down a good road
However I want to talk about serious issue for a moment please, in relation to this post.... a dark issue
I see you look forward to Fan Fest Feedback and I think this is a great idea, however it has recently come to the attention of myself and others that a certain menacing force will be gathering at Fan fest, threatening those who disagree with them
It is even rumored that (some) of these menaces are 'legit ex cons'
I myself read that they will send players to the hospitals
Can you provide any guarantees that people who attend CCP events like Fan Fest are not threatened, accosted and end up in altercations with angry players who disagree with them
Thank you
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Northern Coalition.
1911
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:58:28 -
[270] - Quote
Sassums wrote:So if I am reading this correctly you are continuing to cater to the null sec folks while WH people receive no love.
T3 was our only production option in WH space that didnt require us to leave the WH to produce - with gas reaction BPO's requiring Ice products we will now either have to go out to HS to purchase said ice or roll until we find a shattered that has ice belts (that will almost always guarantee a gank)
T3 Production should continue to be a W-Space product and should not require K-Space components.
If this is changing then W-Space should be allowed to harvest resources from the moons of the systems we inhabit.
If not - remove the stupid ice requirement from T3 reactions.
care to elaborate how you can run gas reactions without pos fuel? |
|
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
467
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:59:43 -
[271] - Quote
Bill Lane wrote:RIP pure PVP alliances who rely on some passive income. This change literally makes a mining division a requirement for every alliance.
On the plus side, refining. Cool.
Oh and literally these will be priced in the range of citadels/ECs? So all of the POSes from 145 mill for the small tower moon miners to the billion isk large towers, you're telling me EVERY small tower will need to be replaced by something that costs more than a billion isk. Straight up screwing the small guys, and straight up screwing alliances with no mining groups aren't we CCP? For the record my alliance CAN afford it and DOES have a large mining division, so we're not too worried.
What does concern me is how I, as the alliance CEO, will need to start taxing the hell out of everyone to make sure the alliance is making money. We didn't charge corp fees, paid good money for ore buyback, all that. This was by FAR the main income for us so I could pay SRP, give people good money for ores/salvage, etc. And we really aren't putting very much in the alliance wallet. We're not broke, but we're not rich by far.
Honestly taxing the hell out of everybody sounds like a terrible idea. Guess corp fees are being forced on us now, along with awesome taxes. Come on now, this is really the best we could come up with?
"booh!"... Players have to invest in a game to play it. "booh!"... More activity in space is less content! Euhm? "booh!"... Players have to invest non passive isk in their corp!
Are we playing the same EVE?
"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X
"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron
-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
|
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force IT'S ONLY PIXELS
232
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:04:50 -
[272] - Quote
The more I think about this the more complex this change is going to be, and one that could very well have lasting economic repercussions. It's not just some new content being added to the game, you're talking about a fundamental rebalancing of Eve's economy. This is not the sort of thing you rush into.
There are only so many miners in this game and PvPers aren't going to start mining for barges so they can have moon income. This means that for every miner that moves away from Ore mining, the amount available will reduce driving up the cost of the ore. This will have a knock on effect to ships which will become more expensive.
Furthermore, I doubt that even the largest alliances in Eve have the personnel to mine belts 24/7 without a break as they are mined now by the automated process, therefore there will be less moon goo available. Less moon goo means more expensive goo, which in turn means more expensive ships again.
Couple all this with small Alliances and/or Corporations having to scrap their SRP programmes and you have more people focusing on making money and less on having fun. Less fun means less customers because no one's going to subscribe to play a second job.
I'm all for bottom up income but it needs to be introduced a incrementally over a much longer time scale than is being proposed here, with changes being made to other areas of the game first, not least making mining a more attractive pull to a potential new player, in order to increase the number of miners in the game so that there isn't a massive amount of money taken out of the system over night.
13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:05:33 -
[273] - Quote
TheSmokingHertog wrote:
Are we playing the same EVE?
Everybody plays his or her EVE |
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
93
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:33:57 -
[274] - Quote
While I would prefer to see moons keep their current diversity & scarcity, I'm willing to bet 315 isk that the quality of the moon goo field is based on what type of moon laser pulled the rock in.
Standup M Moon Laser I > r4,8,16 Standup M Moon Laser II > r4, 8,16, 32 Standup L Moon Laser I > r4, 8,16, 32 Standup L Moon Laser II > r4, 8,16, 32, 64
This would be overall bad for null because of moon equality making different regions less necessary to fight over, but I think it would be significantly better for low sec because now any moon in any low sec system can give r 32 & 64 if you put down enough isk.
Also, if this is true, and a corp can put down 3-7 of these in a system to create daily mining opportunities for its members, then t2 production might finally break free from Jita, and local markets might be more prolific and less dependent on JF scheduling. |
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
72
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:47:23 -
[275] - Quote
Querns wrote:
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now.
Well you can talk easy with 20k Chars in alliance and enough dronelike people who can bear mining ops for hours but i left nullsec because of that. Mindnumbing Boredom while (not) making isk and Aegis Sov. But that were the Saranen times in early summer... Also, how much ISK in reserves does your alliance have? something between +1t and +10t?
I can also perfectly understand that Goons are the last entity to complain about a potential Buff to their playstyle. I've been part of old NC, CFC and Imperium for more than half my playtime (seven years) and if i still were a member i wouldn't mind that much because i would get my SRP, and my corp would do well financially, regardless of moonchanges.
But in Lowsec, we simply do not want to mine because thats why we are in lowsec and not in nullsec after all.
If we have no choice, we will surely adapt, but as long as there is room for improvement and change of Dev dcisions, at least i will be like CCPlease, change this and that so you don't ruin my experience of this game I'm paying you to play, for multiple accounts for more than seven years.
Its a valid thing to do.
Maybe, even it will not be that bad, since some kind of mining plattform was to be introduced, that mines a belt for you if i got that right...
Zanar Skwigelf wrote: This would be overall bad for null because of moon equality making different regions less necessary to fight over, but I think it would be significantly better for low sec because now any moon in any low sec system can give r 32 & 64 if you put down enough isk.
May you explain how exactly tieing the quality of goo to the level of laser would impvoe Low and nerf null, because i dont get it? |
mkint
1671
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:52:00 -
[276] - Quote
Why do I get the feeling that this is going to be a huge mess? Even discounting the bad design philosophy, it feels like the rollout itself is just going to absolutely destroy the economy. Since this absolutely shuts down all moon production that is not done by mega-alliances, there will be mass shortages. On top of that, the economic results of the new reaction process would also be unpredictable. They can't do a soft rollout (new and old existing side by side) because then they'd have to give ridiculous buffs to the mega-alliances because nobody would voluntarily use this system over the existing one.
When I cancelled my sub a couple years ago, I told myself it was going to stay cancelled until CCP followed through on their promises to move away from N+1. This whole idea is so broken that the only way to fix it is adding even more N+1 to it. This goes so far in the opposite direction of what made EVE ever matter, that EVE and CCP might just be a lost cause. That everything about CCP's mindset over the past year or two screams N+1 so loudly it makes me think the company might just be irredeemable.
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
Tialano Utrigas
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
102
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:54:12 -
[277] - Quote
Couple of questions to consider:
1. So right now these structures are funded by corporations who, generally, make money by mining moons where the goo is simply transported and sold by a trusted few.
This system means that corporations have to forcibly tax their members for this to continue, otherwise how are the corporations going to pay for the running and build cost of these structures?
2. Has any thought been put into the amount of goo (and if it will only be one resource) these fields will generate with a view of preventing massive market fluctuations with the goo and by extension T2 ships and modules?
3. Right now most small - medium size alliances support their infrastructure with a number of low value moons.. Is there a risk that these alliances could burn their members out just to make ends meet and retain their sov if they have to have mining ops on a daily basis.
Overall I like, but I think there needs to be a review on how corporations/alliances fund themselves now. |
Edek Hawker
Serpent Sun Roadhouse Regulars
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:55:43 -
[278] - Quote
Querns wrote:Edek Hawker wrote: If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :)
Considering T3 reactions burn ice in the form of POS fuel currently, no, there's no chance that it would be removed.
Oh? So the refinery will NOT be using fuel blocks *sarcasm Please try again goon...
|
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:56:25 -
[279] - Quote
Nerriana wrote:The Idea for "mining ledger" sounds like far too much automated intel for big blocks. Where is the commitment to deliberately allowing scamming, stealing and other shenanigans?
Making it possible for dishonest miners and/or mining coordinators to skim a bit is not a bug, it's a feature on EvE. What we really do not need is an automated bookkeeping system for big alliances to "big brother" their serfs.
Likewise, we don't want an automated system to monitor resources (what spontaneously-disintegrating moon goo field would be) so that aforementioned big alliances can know exactly who ninja-mined their semi-abandoned resources. This monitoring could become a seed for OTEC cartel 2.0, with big alliances more concerned of preventing protecting and exploiting their chokehold on critical materials.
On same vein the sizes of spawned moongoo-asteroids and the amount of moongoo they contain should be somewhat randomized. I know this would be a change from current steady-flow moon mining, but see above regarding opportunities for skimming.
Otherwise the idea sounds an improvement for current moon mining situation.
totaly agree - Big Alliances have "power" to sit days cloaking in the system of thair targets - so let them have some fun guarding thair own belt using cloaking bombers with cyno.
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:56:40 -
[280] - Quote
may anyone explain the term N+1 to a no-math guy? |
|
sgtdale
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:01:05 -
[281] - Quote
Rowells wrote:I'm too scared to read it. Plz tell me everything is gonna be ok. PLEASE TELL ME ITS OK.
adding complexities for complexies sake does not make for better game play. Trying to force people to join corrupt corps and alliances to use the new toys, will only decrease the number of paying players.
|
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2107
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:02:16 -
[282] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Quote:Once the chunk of moon rock has completed its journey into space, the Refinery can use its drill module to detonate the chunk into a minable asteroid field. The exact time of the detonation is controlled by the owners of the Refinery within limits. If the chunk is left unattended long enough it will disintegrate into the asteroid field on its own. Why the delay? I feel, that the Owner already scheduled the date with the teamminingcrew. So there was already a decision. If formup is bad or enemy is prepared, why should this state of boredom be prolonged? If it was immediately detonated upon impact, there is going to be a time of clash possible. The exact time that can be read by all. Yes, ok. You might want to give the owner some feeling of power and control. But in the end the only decision that comes out of this particular mechanic is: Just do it Wait and go to bed late this night while not doing anything more meaningful in eve this session. So CCPLEASE make it immediate!!! Defender: - you see that it's bad time to harvest moon goo. You don't blow it up and just go do another activities Attacker: - you blocked owner from harvesting goo, you can go and do something else.
Seriously: You say like it's high-sec wardecs which make people sit docked for weeks.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3251
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:04:06 -
[283] - Quote
Tialano Utrigas wrote:Couple of questions to consider:
1. So right now these structures are funded by corporations who, generally, make money by mining moons where the goo is simply transported and sold by a trusted few.
This system means that corporations have to forcibly tax their members for this to continue, otherwise how are the corporations going to pay for the running and build cost of these structures?
2. Has any thought been put into the amount of goo (and if it will only be one resource) these fields will generate with a view of preventing massive market fluctuations with the goo and by extension T2 ships and modules?
3. Right now most small - medium size alliances support their infrastructure with a number of low value moons.. Is there a risk that these alliances could burn their members out just to make ends meet and retain their sov if they have to have mining ops on a daily basis.
Overall I like, but I think there needs to be a review on how corporations/alliances fund themselves now.
It's all essentially a profit as you use system so if your corp does not have the manpower to do it, it should either recruit to get it or abandon the moon.
The amount of Goo available will be scarce during the transition unless people start stockpiling more but everyone should know it now. The change is coming so preparing for it is important. For the future after implementation, it will all depends on how much each cycle of the drill generate in space and get mined. If the doom and gloom prevision of all low-sec people are true and not a single moon from there gets mined ever, then the price will likely stay high or raise until less tress is put on the market OR it reach a price where low-sec mining start becoming a thing.
The alliance/corp getting funded by passive POS mining should have read the message in the sky that it was going away. |
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
93
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:04:17 -
[284] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:
May you explain how exactly tieing the quality of goo to the level of laser would impvoe Low and nerf null, because i dont get it?
If I'm understanding the current layout, r64 moons are not evenly distributed in null, and very rare in low.
Making any moon capable of r64 would make it less necessary to fight for space in null. I wasn't calling it a direct nerf, but poorly worded my point.
It would also improve the isk making capabilities of systems in null and low. Increasing the frequency of quality material is not necessarily a nerf to null, but definitely a buff to low |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3251
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:05:22 -
[285] - Quote
Edek Hawker wrote:Querns wrote:Edek Hawker wrote: If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :)
Considering T3 reactions burn ice in the form of POS fuel currently, no, there's no chance that it would be removed. Oh? So the refinery will NOT be using fuel blocks *sarcasm Please try again goon...
They surely don't use as much as all the tower required to perform 400 parallel reaction you will be able to do in a single refinery. |
WitcherW
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:06:34 -
[286] - Quote
This is GREAT thing! Now more peole now can participate in this new industry work and it is NOT just for big aliances privileges !
Old moon milking way just for big aliances is rly suck ,you get pasive mony - buy ship - go kill some people -and if you lose ship...who care you get new for "free" . Now you need to work if you want something like all normal people and not looking to that mony falls from the sky(in in this case from moon )
GJ CCP just keep going! |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3251
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:06:53 -
[287] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:may anyone explain the term N+1 to a no-math guy?
Strength in numbers. What I can do with an amount of people, I can do better with that many people plus one. More miner will in theory enable you to mine more moons since actual man-hours will be needed to mine them now. |
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2107
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:08:00 -
[288] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote:h4kun4 wrote: It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now, in anticipation of this change. The signs have been there for years; you just have to think a little further out from where your next Level 5 mission or travelling supercap gank comes from. From all the apoplectic posting here and from without, it seems like lowsec entities have the adaptability of my last bowel movement. It raises an interesting set of questions. Adaptation and innovation are always a necessity - but is it healthy if every player dynamic falls within the same guiding paths and ends up adopting the same kind of organisational model. I'm not so sure whether the underlying issue with the low sec people's responses is the passive isk dependancy, there may very well be much more to it in terms of having to become something they never wanted to be. Deliberately so. Granted, this too is a topic of adapting to changes, but it is also a topic of niche gameplay and connected choices. People usually deny "right" of high-sec afk miners to do their "niche" gameplay and force them to be more active and fit more tank, etc.... I think the same rule applies to anyone.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1109
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:11:09 -
[289] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:There are only so many miners in this game and PvPers aren't going to start training for barges so they can have moon income. This means that for every miner that moves away from Ore mining, the amount available will reduce driving up the cost of the ore. This will have a knock on effect to ships which will become more expensive, potentially reducing the amount of PvP undertaken by players.
Furthermore, I doubt that even the largest alliances in Eve have the personnel to mine belts 24/7 without a break as they are mined now by the automated process, therefore there will be less moon goo available. Less moon goo means more expensive goo, which in turn means more expensive ships again. You're basing this off of what? They haven't even hinted at the m^3 these new rocks are going to be, only that the ISK/m^3 will be better than ABCs
Considering right now Arkonor brings in 312.5 ISK/m^3 that means dysprosium must come in at a minimum rate of 1 unit per 224 m^3
This means that to equal a moon in the worst case scenario its just under 92 hulk hours per month. I would say a far more reasonable comparison would be a more mid range moon goo like Tech which works out to be just under 16 hulk hours a month to equal a moon, and that's if you just want to break even.
considering the developers can fine tune this ad infinum, I'm not too worried. |
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:15:19 -
[290] - Quote
WitcherW wrote:This is GREAT thing! Now more peole now can participate in this new industry work and it is NOT just for big aliances privileges ! Old moon milking way just for big aliances is rly suck ,you get pasive mony - buy ship - go kill some people -and if you lose ship...who care you get new for "free" . Now you need to work if you want something like all normal people and not looking to that mony falls from the sky(in in this case from moon ) GJ CCP just keep going!
yes... IF CCP will continue work in this spirit eve will be grate again in no time, and fun too. but why we had wait so long for this... they realy have tones of posts to remake moon mining for this all years. realy CCP 100 laches for all your members - now you do what you should have done 6 years ago. |
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1109
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:18:10 -
[291] - Quote
Bill Lane wrote:RIP pure PVP alliances who rely on some passive income. This change literally makes a mining division a requirement for every alliance.
On the plus side, refining. Cool.
Oh and literally these will be priced in the range of citadels/ECs? So all of the POSes from 145 mill for the small tower moon miners to the billion isk large towers, you're telling me EVERY small tower will need to be replaced by something that costs more than a billion isk. Straight up screwing the small guys, and straight up screwing alliances with no mining groups aren't we CCP? For the record my alliance CAN afford it and DOES have a large mining division, so we're not too worried.
What does concern me is how I, as the alliance CEO, will need to start taxing the hell out of everyone to make sure the alliance is making money. We didn't charge corp fees, paid good money for ore buyback, all that. This was by FAR the main income for us so I could pay SRP, give people good money for ores/salvage, etc. And we really aren't putting very much in the alliance wallet. We're not broke, but we're not rich by far.
Honestly taxing the hell out of everybody sounds like a terrible idea. Guess corp fees are being forced on us now, along with awesome taxes. Come on now, this is really the best we could come up with? What the crap were you doing wrong that you were moon mining with small towers? Pretty much everyone mines with large towers for 3 reasons.
1. Profit - if your moons arent super profitable, you want to use as few of them as possible, and do all of the extracting/reacting in one place. 2. Defense - If your moons are super profitable, you want a large tower there to protect them. 3. Practicality - POSs are cancer, and the fewer of them people have to deal with generally the happier they are. |
sgtdale
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:23:07 -
[292] - Quote
Malcolm Erkkinen wrote:So another nail in the coffin of small miners / manufacturers? Surely this means players will need to join a large Corp or get into another line of business.
or just quit the game |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2770
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:32:00 -
[293] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:Querns wrote:
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now.
Well you can talk easy with 20k Chars in alliance and enough dronelike people who can bear mining ops for hours but i left nullsec because of that. Mindnumbing Boredom while (not) making isk and Aegis Sov. But that were the Saranen times in early summer... Also, how much ISK in reserves does your alliance have? something between +1t and +10t?
This comment is pretty telling, because the underlying assumption here is that moongoo = SRP. This is incorrect; income = SRP. Moongoo is only one form of income. It's certainly the easiest from an administrative point of view (especially if you're like 99% of non-GSF moonhavers and are terrible at the market,) but it's only one form.
You can fund an alliance without gangpressing folks into mining. We're certainly not going to gangpress anyone into mining the stuff that comes out of refineries. Heck, I'm not even 100% sure if we're going to erect any in our space.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2770
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:34:58 -
[294] - Quote
Edek Hawker wrote:Querns wrote:Edek Hawker wrote: If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :)
Considering T3 reactions burn ice in the form of POS fuel currently, no, there's no chance that it would be removed. Oh? So the refinery will NOT be using fuel blocks *sarcasm Please try again goon...
Sure.
Since reactions are a RAM activity, a single facility can perform a number of reactions approaching infinity. (Cost index goes here.) Because of this, you don't need to erect a tower for each gas reaction (or pair,) you just need one. This drastically reduces the fuel cost of running any kind of reaction, be it WH gas or otherwise.
To keep the use of ice from plummeting, all reactions must include some ice usage.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
10652
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:36:24 -
[295] - Quote
Seeing the tears from the entrenched alliances tells me that CCP is on the right track with this.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:00:04 -
[296] - Quote
I don't like it.
It's not realistic.
Why is Saudi Arabia better off than Yemen?
It has massive passive income. Every two weeks, they don't mobilize their entire population with buckets to go bail the oil into barges. That's stupid. If it had to be bailed into barges, this tedious, dangerous, and thankless work would be done by Yemeni's granted a two day work visa.
Why did Saddam Hussein invade Kuwait and why did the west mobilize to stop him? Massive passive income, and the super-alliances mobilized to protect their investment.
The game is fun because it mimics real geo-politics.
You're saying that every oil field everywhere will have to be hand scooped to market. On it's face, that's just stupid. Now the resource has minimal value and the truly valuable commodity is cheap and/or forced labor.
As an >2 yo player, I'll remind you that these years spent grinding roids and havens have been the least enjoyable of my career, apart from the first few months when it all was new and exciting.
All this was done to reach the point I'm at now where I can react, build, and have the resources to support a corporation, contribute to the alliance, and actually begin to PLAY eve for content, pvp, political turf wars.
I'm not a moon miner. I'm a reactor and builder. If this nerf turns reacting into PI (requiring three alts and endless toon switching) you've ruined the game for me. Clearly, removing any meaningful barrier to entry into the reactions business will kill any volatility there, so there goes the viability of that vocation.
I know I can "win" the game plexing 6 accounts to multibox mine (ice, ore, or perhaps moon goo). I can "win" the game with 10 PI alts, a massive spreadsheet, and streamlined logistics. Neither of those are PLAYING the game though.
Playing the game is scraping together tens of billions in isk through hard work and cooperation and then hanging your whole investment out into lawless space and seeing if Saddam comes to take it away, and if your buddies will have your back.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2894
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:03:09 -
[297] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:A set of new Upwell Structures is in the works: Behold the Upwell Refineries! Refineries will be the premiere structure for resource collection and processing. They have bonuses to reprocessing and the exclusive ability to fit moon mining and reaction service modules.This will give us completely new gameplay for moon mining and reactions, as well as linking into future resource collection gameplay. Check out the exciting details in this blog Introducing Upwell Refineries
Posted this somewhere else but i'll put it here so you see it:
Quote: This seems pretty easy right, heres a simple fix that makes this viable:
The entire time its dragging its chunk of moon up that it fracked off, its vulnerable. If you knock a miner into its final timer any fracking gravity drag move stops.
Look at me, I'm a ducking genius.
Single point conflict restored, moon mining is a bottom up process that its meant to be and we don't all have to **** around with AUTZ timer spam.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2771
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:03:55 -
[298] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:I don't like it.
It's not realistic.
This is a video game.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
sgtdale
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:05:12 -
[299] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:I see internal diplomatic incidents waiting to happen. Once mined, there's no way to force someone to pay you a fee. This literally is asking for drama, and not the good kind, but the players/corps being kicked from their alliances kind due to the actions of the few kind.
First, might I suggest causing the structure to put a "barrier" along the belt which when crossed will warn that a % fee based on the value will be deducted from the player's wallet (based on the owner's settings) at the end of every cycle. If they can't pay the fee the cycle fails and that's that. Allow this to be bypassed by a new form of the "siphon" units which allow entry undetected of the anchoring player. Entries show within the mining log as "unknown" but still have it log the stolen goods. These new deployables should be 1 shot deals which cannot be picked up and last for their duration maybe an hour, up to a day.
Last point, simply due to the number of moons in existence, and the unknown size of the belts created (I'd assume along the lines of what we see in a small belt anomaly, this could take a lot of time even if you stagger them. The task of mining the materials will be daunting. Perhaps consider allowing the structures to still passively mine the material over the 1-2 week cycle that it takes for the next rock to be hauled up. That way once the new rock is there, the previous one has been cleared.
This also allows for a constant amount of materials to continue to enter the market, but allows for players to speed up the process without actually effecting volume. Picking my pocket automagically would be fine if it also automagically gets my ganked mining ship and fit replaced out of the pocket of the owner of the moon fracking thing.......... |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2772
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:06:14 -
[300] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:CCP Phantom wrote:A set of new Upwell Structures is in the works: Behold the Upwell Refineries! Refineries will be the premiere structure for resource collection and processing. They have bonuses to reprocessing and the exclusive ability to fit moon mining and reaction service modules.This will give us completely new gameplay for moon mining and reactions, as well as linking into future resource collection gameplay. Check out the exciting details in this blog Introducing Upwell Refineries Posted this somewhere else but i'll put it here so you see it: Quote: This seems pretty easy right, heres a simple fix that makes this viable:
The entire time its dragging its chunk of moon up that it fracked off, its vulnerable. If you knock a miner into its final timer any fracking gravity drag move stops.
Look at me, I'm a ducking genius.
Single point conflict restored, moon mining is a bottom up process that its meant to be and we don't all have to **** around with AUTZ timer spam.
Nah. Just don't be lazy and you'll be fine.
You guys even have an AUTZ corp--- oh, wait, no.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2772
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:07:10 -
[301] - Quote
sgtdale wrote: Picking my pocket automagically would be fine if it also automagically gets my ganked mining ship and fit replaced out of the pocket of the owner of the moon fracking thing..........
It can; most folks call it "SRP."
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
74
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:08:54 -
[302] - Quote
Well, ok, moongoo isnt the only source of income thats true, but its a major one, the problem with income in lowsec is that its simpy hard to get in masses like nullsec can.
Tax don't get you anywhere since you earn money with loot from people, plexes or with LP and not with bounties. Anomalies and sigs are spawning lucky and yield poor raw isk in lowsec. In null you can at least count on some income from Tax and maybe even renters. The two greatest ways of passive income are moonimining and reaction farms and both will be different, maybe reactionfarms on citadel will be wothwhile. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2772
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:10:46 -
[303] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:Well, ok, moongoo isnt the only source of income thats true, but its a major one, the problem with income in lowsec is that its simpy hard to get in masses like nullsec can.
Tax don't get you anywhere since you earn money with loot from people, plexes or with LP and not with bounties. Anomalies and sigs are spawning lucky and yield poor raw isk in lowsec. In null you can at least count on some income from Tax and maybe even renters. The two greatest ways of passive income are moonimining and reaction farms and both will be different, maybe reactionfarms on citadel will be wothwhile.
It's almost like they're trying to get rid of passive income.
It's hilarious how bad you guys (read: the rest of eve) are at finance. It's not even complicated. The tiny possibility space you're putting out there is just :shobon: as all hell.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2894
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 16:57:35 -
[304] - Quote
Querns wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:CCP Phantom wrote:A set of new Upwell Structures is in the works: Behold the Upwell Refineries! Refineries will be the premiere structure for resource collection and processing. They have bonuses to reprocessing and the exclusive ability to fit moon mining and reaction service modules.This will give us completely new gameplay for moon mining and reactions, as well as linking into future resource collection gameplay. Check out the exciting details in this blog Introducing Upwell Refineries Posted this somewhere else but i'll put it here so you see it: Quote: This seems pretty easy right, heres a simple fix that makes this viable:
The entire time its dragging its chunk of moon up that it fracked off, its vulnerable. If you knock a miner into its final timer any fracking gravity drag move stops.
Look at me, I'm a ducking genius.
Single point conflict restored, moon mining is a bottom up process that its meant to be and we don't all have to **** around with AUTZ timer spam.
Nah. Just don't be lazy and you'll be fine. You guys even have an AUTZ corp--- oh, wait, no.
We're actually pulling 100+ guys for most AUTZ ops after Dansara spent a few months rebuilding it, the point of my post is to keep the moon miner viable as a fight generator and avoid the stupidity that comes from the current garbage of '3 timers and a week of time for a citadel with no fuel in it at all thats not defended'
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:11:54 -
[305] - Quote
I have a couple thoughts on this.
1. Make the m3 of the initial mined rocks sorta cumbersome so that moon material at least gets refined locally so moon goo stays within the group holding it.
2. reduce timers to 2 on medium structures.
3. Make it so when fracking moons structures have a larger vulnerability window. I do not like the idea of if it is fracking it is vulnerable but if there are short medium and large fracking options have this impact the window the structure is able to be attacked. small adds +2 hours to window med +4 large +6. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2777
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:12:15 -
[306] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Querns wrote: Nah. Just don't be lazy and you'll be fine.
You guys even have an AUTZ corp--- oh, wait, no.
We're actually pulling 100+ guys for most AUTZ ops after Dansara spent a few months rebuilding it, the point of my post is to keep the moon miner viable as a fight generator and avoid the stupidity that comes from the current garbage of '3 timers and a week of time for a citadel with no fuel in it at all thats not defended'
Man, you guys must have hated Dominion sov if you can't handle three or more timers for a thing.
Given the rate that your alliance (and others) slaughter rorquals in our space, one would think you'd see the fight potential in these things.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2894
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:28:59 -
[307] - Quote
Querns wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Querns wrote: Nah. Just don't be lazy and you'll be fine.
You guys even have an AUTZ corp--- oh, wait, no.
We're actually pulling 100+ guys for most AUTZ ops after Dansara spent a few months rebuilding it, the point of my post is to keep the moon miner viable as a fight generator and avoid the stupidity that comes from the current garbage of '3 timers and a week of time for a citadel with no fuel in it at all thats not defended' Man, you guys must have hated Dominion sov if you can't handle three or more timers for a thing. Given the rate that your alliance (and others) slaughter rorquals in our space, one would think you'd see the fight potential in these things.
The POTENTIAL is there, but, given current citadel tactics everybody is simply going to put these to down time for vulnerability and at best you'll be ganking miners while its active.
The structure itself will end up entirely immune, which sucks because like or not hitting a moon miners is a fairly huge part in nullsec warfare, its one of those things that allow smaller entities to harass larger entities in a meaningful way, not just 'lol ganked ur hulk'
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Arehm Bukandara
Rowan Trade Guild
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:30:46 -
[308] - Quote
Questions:
1.) What are the vulnerability times? 2.) What happens to the moon chunk if the refinery is destroyed while the chunk is still being pulled from the moon? 3.) Can the moon rocks be harvested with any mining laser? If so, will there be mining crystals for these rocks? 4.) Will the moon rocks need to be reprocessed? I'm guessing this is a "yes" 5.) Will there be more than one type of medium? Large? 6.) How many m3 are the rocks and what are their refining bases? |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:34:55 -
[309] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:I have a couple thoughts on this.
1. Make the m3 of the initial mined rocks sorta cumbersome so that moon material at least gets refined locally so moon goo stays within the group holding it.
2. reduce timers to 2 on medium structures.
3. Make it so when fracking moons structures have a larger vulnerability window. I do not like the idea of if it is fracking it is vulnerable but if there are short medium and large fracking options have this impact the window the structure is able to be attacked. small adds +2 hours to window med +4 large +6.
Cumbersome M3 would be awesome if resources were distributed across all of New Eden, but the way it is now, it has to go to Jita... or at least you do to get the missing mats from any t2/reaction chain.
Then you're talking about full chain production in nul and low, some of which is done, but is not really the way it works atm.
I like the suggestion some have made that physically mining the moons w a mining fleet could speed up or increase yield, but that passive recovery continues in some form.
It depends what the mysterious goal is. If it's to eliminate passive income, I guess we'll see how many people want to pay for a game where u just sit there staring at a rock. Seems like an uphill climb for a recruiter imho.. lol.
If the goal is to encourage non-sov pvp and to force engagements, I've said, and have seen others say, why not just make the fracked chunk destroyable or create a mechanic where chunks can be stolen and set beside your cit on a blank moon that will refine it.
Then you have pvp engagements. My fleet is here to defend. Yours is coming to steal. Let's go. Instead of having to grind-mine, burn out of a bubble in a miner, warp to cit, reship, come back and fight. Or, we see a "stealing fleet" in the area in intel. Can we form up in time to stop you, or do you come destroy our chunk or steal a lot of it because we're not prepared.
Just the same mechanic is boring. You're entosising = your helpless, they come to kill helpless, maybe fight ensues. You're mining with rorq mod active = helpless, they come to kill, maybe fight ensues You're ratting in a slow align carrier or w bastion active = (close to) helpless, they come to kill, maybe fight ensues You're mining your moon field at a set location and time w the bulk of your alliance forced into barges and exhumers = comparatively helpless until you reship
Let's skip the foreplay and get to the fight |
Edek Hawker
Serpent Sun Roadhouse Regulars
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:42:05 -
[310] - Quote
Querns wrote:Edek Hawker wrote:Querns wrote:Edek Hawker wrote: If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :)
Considering T3 reactions burn ice in the form of POS fuel currently, no, there's no chance that it would be removed. Oh? So the refinery will NOT be using fuel blocks *sarcasm Please try again goon... Sure. Since reactions are a RAM activity, a single facility can perform a number of reactions approaching infinity. (Cost index goes here.) Because of this, you don't need to erect a tower for each gas reaction (or pair,) you just need one. This drastically reduces the fuel cost of running any kind of reaction, be it WH gas or otherwise. To keep the use of ice from plummeting, all reactions must include some ice usage.
I admit that I am not an economic expert I am more of a 2+2=4 kind of guy. The results of ice products price falling to my perspective means that either 1 of 2 things happen. 1) The price of T2/T3 products come down hopefully making the ships in particular closer to insurance payouts meaning more people can afford them easier meaning more are available to be blown up more often. I don't see this as a bad thing. 2) The price of T2/T3 products stays the same meaning the industrialist that make them make more profit allowing them to expand their operations which again I don't see as a bad thing.
This perspective does not include any projections on the amount of moon goo available for manufacturing from the new mining operations put forth in the Dev Blog I'm only speaking of the differences I see resulting from the inclusion of ice products in the reaction process. |
|
Lonan O'Labhradha
Dystopian Heaven Hedonistic Imperative
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:44:35 -
[311] - Quote
I think many doomsayers are being rather short sighted.
Ninja Mining/Siphoning:
You can't siphon from a tower now without letting the owner know who you are--the siphon has your name on it. Thus, when people siphon from a moon in nullsec (keep in mind that no one actually does this because we're all honest and upstanding citizens of the various factions and would never wish to steal resources from our neighbors), one uses a neutral alt so that the illicit activities do not impact the faction standings.
The same will be true for Ninja Mining under the CCP proposed system: You ninja mine moon goo with a neutral alt. If someone is there manning the tower, they shoot you. Just like if someone today is watching the tower and they see your siphon... Well, they take the goo out and blow it up.
The change is what you use to siphon. In the new system, you siphon with a ninja minng fleet probably composed of Prospects or perhaps some new ninja mining ship CCP comes up with that doesn't have a transponder and doesn't identify itself to the structure.
Passive/Active Mining:
The key piece that a lot of people are missing is that mining ships need to be used to gather goo under the new system. This means that Moon Goo becomes intertwined with Ice and Minerals as there are still the same number of miner labor hours in the population. If Goo collection starts taking half of your mining hours whereas before you split it between Ice and Minerals, and mineral production takes a bath with only 10% of your time, well then you produce fewer minerals in your population and they become more scarce--the price goes up and the price of goo comes down because everyone invested their work hours in goo.
As long as goo is mostly passive income there is very little labor factor in its price.
Passive mining presently allows the large nullsec blocs to set up giant moon fields that make up some fraction of their income. Some large blocs may not use moon goo extensively for funding, but some do. Adding a labor component forces them to more directly administer their moon goo production. Renting a moon becomes harder because of ninja mining and it forces the bloc to have ships or personnel in the area to chase off ninja miners when the goo fields spawn.
Increasing the cost of goo towers also means there will be less of them and likely more diversity of minerals on moons to make mining them worthwhile. It is likely that instead of having single, rare moons that spawn R64/32 materials, that the extracted moon goo ore fields will simply feature rare asteroids or less rare asteroids that feature small or trace amounts of valuable minerals or a combination thereof.
The present labor cost of moon goo towers is not 0. People have been saying that it's "passive income", but as someone who has run towers before, this is far from the case. Running a tower requires a lot of time and they're not very forgiving when you want to be lazy--your silos fill up and goo is lost and fuel is still consumed, or worse, you run out of fuel and the stick goes dead leaving all your stuff open to looters. Fuel costs fluctuate and sometimes, espcecially in certain areas, fuel becomes difficult to access. Large towers require immense amounts of fuel and are almost required to do certain refining processes. They have to be maintained for a few hours per week to manage the fueling, extraction, and configuration of your reactions.
If your reaction has non-local inputs, you have to buy those and ferry them usually from Jita out to the tower to complete your outputs. Using a Jump Freighter is the most efficient way to keep the tower set up, but flying jump freighters around costs fuel, too, and requires a lot of movement of cynos and in regions where you don't have a safe structure, you have to jump to space where you are vulnerable adding risk to labor.
Low sec Opportunities:
As I mentioned, instead of using haulers to move moon goo around, you now will use a miner. Obviously since you're sitting at a structure with infinite storage, you can just dump the mined goo into the extremely nearby structure and then probably compress it making it way easier to transport to hi sec or you can refine and react it just like you used to without having to set up elaborate Rube Goldberg machines by positioning little bits and bobs in a space bubble.
It's not like you were just sitting in your PvP ship watching your bank balance roll up... Someone was transporting and selling all of that stuff between all of those towers likely in a Deep Space Transport which is a giant pain in the ass. Now you don't have those haulers running around. You have a Miasmos picking minerals out of cans floating in space and occasionally depositing them in a structure within 350km instead of a station 8 jumps out.
Plus, now most or all of your goo is coming from just a few moons (one for smaller groups) instead of 20-50 moons scattered all over a region.
I'll bet that a group who's sitting high on the hog feeding off of a nice juicy R64 with no reactions to speak of feels a bit dejected, but you probably should... The balance of moon income is likely to spread out a bit more.
And if you still say that your hauler guy doesn't like mining, well, that's fine, too. Contract it out and then sit in your PvP ships while you hunt incoming poachers. Nothing attracts PvP like a defenseless mining fleet.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3253
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:45:22 -
[312] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:I have a couple thoughts on this.
1. Make the m3 of the initial mined rocks sorta cumbersome so that moon material at least gets refined locally so moon goo stays within the group holding it.
2. reduce timers to 2 on medium structures.
3. Make it so when fracking moons structures have a larger vulnerability window. I do not like the idea of if it is fracking it is vulnerable but if there are short medium and large fracking options have this impact the window the structure is able to be attacked. small adds +2 hours to window med +4 large +6. Cumbersome M3 would be awesome if resources were distributed across all of New Eden, but the way it is now, it has to go to Jita... or at least you do to get the missing mats from any t2/reaction chain.
Big m3 for the rocks but small for the refined product mean you are likely to refine tax the miner for corp/alliance income while still leaving the ability to use Hubs for distribution. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:52:10 -
[313] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Leo Augustus wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:I have a couple thoughts on this.
1. Make the m3 of the initial mined rocks sorta cumbersome so that moon material at least gets refined locally so moon goo stays within the group holding it.
2. reduce timers to 2 on medium structures.
3. Make it so when fracking moons structures have a larger vulnerability window. I do not like the idea of if it is fracking it is vulnerable but if there are short medium and large fracking options have this impact the window the structure is able to be attacked. small adds +2 hours to window med +4 large +6. Cumbersome M3 would be awesome if resources were distributed across all of New Eden, but the way it is now, it has to go to Jita... or at least you do to get the missing mats from any t2/reaction chain. Big m3 for the rocks but small for the refined product mean you are likely to refine tax the miner for corp/alliance income while still leaving the ability to use Hubs for distribution.
That is what I meant to get across.
Thanks |
Lonan O'Labhradha
Dystopian Heaven Hedonistic Imperative
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 17:59:44 -
[314] - Quote
Continued...
RIP Small Corporations
Small corps likely rely on R16 and lower moons to get by which means you're probably reacting and have multiple POSes. I say this because R32/64 moons tend to be found and captured by larger entities because of their worth which means that if you're small and you're on an R64, someone is probably going to come by, scan your moon, find out it Dysprosium or Technetium on it and then drop dreads to blow up your POS and take it.
This means that you have probably already spent at least the price of a medium refinery on POSes to eke out a passable corporate income and you sit around worrying that your DST is going to get blown up as it travels between your POSes and your station and you'll be out either a bunch of money in lost fuel or in lost goo.
A refinery will likely produce a wider variety of goo and you'll be able to collect and react it at a station that's super safe for things like Jump Freighters to visit so your supply lines are better, but you have to fly a mining barge to collect minerals and someone might come ninja some if you're not careful (just like they can today).
This also provides a new type of pirate corp--Indy Pirates! Indy Pirates go out and ninja mine moon goo from unmanned refineries. You pop in, scoop up the juiciest morsels, and then slip out and all yeah, they got your license plate, but your corp either specializes in ninja mining--in which case you don't care if they don't like you, or you're in an NPC corp, and good luck getting an NPC corp to hold you accountable for "goo taxes". |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2779
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 18:03:46 -
[315] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Querns wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Querns wrote: Nah. Just don't be lazy and you'll be fine.
You guys even have an AUTZ corp--- oh, wait, no.
We're actually pulling 100+ guys for most AUTZ ops after Dansara spent a few months rebuilding it, the point of my post is to keep the moon miner viable as a fight generator and avoid the stupidity that comes from the current garbage of '3 timers and a week of time for a citadel with no fuel in it at all thats not defended' Man, you guys must have hated Dominion sov if you can't handle three or more timers for a thing. Given the rate that your alliance (and others) slaughter rorquals in our space, one would think you'd see the fight potential in these things. The POTENTIAL is there, but, given current citadel tactics everybody is simply going to put these to down time for vulnerability and at best you'll be ganking miners while its active. The structure itself will end up entirely immune, which sucks because like or not hitting a moon miners is a fairly huge part in nullsec warfare, its one of those things that allow smaller entities to harass larger entities in a meaningful way, not just 'lol ganked ur hulk'
The structure will end up immune? I am pretty sure they'll have vulnerability timers, just like other Upwell structures.
"At an inconvenient time for you" isn't the same as "immune."
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Advenat Bedala
Facehoof Out of Sight.
191
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 18:23:52 -
[316] - Quote
Will Rorqual be able to mine moonmats?
*Please say no!* |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2779
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 18:39:13 -
[317] - Quote
Advenat Bedala wrote:Will Rorqual be able to mine moonmats?
*Please say no!*
The chances of this being the case are pretty slim. Why revamp the rorq at all if you don't let it be eligible for the new shiny?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
John Frohike
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:21:06 -
[318] - Quote
Love this, a great excuse to dust off the Expedition Frigates and go raid me some moon goo! |
Gaius Clabbacus
Basket of Deplorables
43
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:34:28 -
[319] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:The POTENTIAL is there, but, given current citadel tactics everybody is simply going to put these to down time for vulnerability and at best you'll be ganking miners while its active.
The structure itself will end up entirely immune, which sucks because like or not hitting a moon miners is a fairly huge part in nullsec warfare, its one of those things that allow smaller entities to harass larger entities in a meaningful way, not just 'lol ganked ur hulk'
Heartwarming to see that the mega-alliances still care for the little guy and are not just arguing for their self-interest. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2780
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:36:38 -
[320] - Quote
Gaius Clabbacus wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:The POTENTIAL is there, but, given current citadel tactics everybody is simply going to put these to down time for vulnerability and at best you'll be ganking miners while its active.
The structure itself will end up entirely immune, which sucks because like or not hitting a moon miners is a fairly huge part in nullsec warfare, its one of those things that allow smaller entities to harass larger entities in a meaningful way, not just 'lol ganked ur hulk' Heartwarming to see that the mega-alliances still care for the little guy and are not just arguing for their self-interest.
It is quite disingenuous to see him campaigning for a change that would let his alliance more easily destroy the infrastructure of a smaller alliance, isn't it?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:46:12 -
[321] - Quote
1. Moon Mining is not passive income. Whoever says that must have a grave misconception of what it means to be passive. Doing a lot of hauling (fuel, goo to market) for some 200M profit per month on a regular R16 moon is not passive by any means. You are probably putting equally or more active time in that, than AFK mining in Null or HighSec for 200M.
2. The current system needs a change, but not because it was passive. It needs a change because it is too easy for the already rich and powerful to just sit on the same moons and almost impossible for any newer guys to enter this activity in EVE without being completely obliterated or forced into becoming the slave of some shitlord.
3. So many people are talking about the New Player Experience and they forget that it doesn't end with a set of missions after a day or two. The actual experience for many New Players is that EVE is in too many ways far too dominated by some established guys and that CCP provides game mechanics that support such lazy-ass dominance rather than making it uncertain for everyone and favoring the active and inventive. Moon Mining is currently one of such mechanics and from what I read so far about the new mechanics this will not change. The only way I could see a change to the better was if the moons holding minerals would constantly change and thereby really forcing people into a more active playstyle.
4. Now someone might argue: "EVE shouldn't feel safe", but this is exactly the phrase you will hear from people who already achieved relative safety: all their possible losses will be replaced within the hour and they don't know the feeling of uncertainty anymore. Make EVE unsafe again, for everyone, no matter how big their blop, no matter how much ISK they already have. That would be a good goal, that would provide for a world which is open enough for more New Players to stay around, because it doesn't have the smell of your grand-fathers old socks.
|
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE Virtus Crusade Protectorate
111
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:46:28 -
[322] - Quote
Arggghh...typed and lost whole response!
shortened version:
How are you going to make the physical immersion break of chunking off a moon repeatedly work?? Are all the moons going to turn to Swiss cheese or croissants?
Booster changes - excellent!
Please rebalance moon mins to be like asteroid mins so that we can build all that we want of T2 in null/WH with less access to that in high.
Last point: I agree with other posters.... I think pure PVP corps in low that rely on passive moon goo (small corps) are going to feel the nerf bat here. Also - bring this in some form to high and null (maybe anomalies) so that people can learn that side of industry.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2780
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:55:06 -
[323] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:1. Moon Mining is not passive income. Whoever says that must have a grave misconception of what it means to be passive. Doing a lot of hauling (fuel, goo to market) for some 200M profit per month on a regular R16 moon is not passive by any means. You are probably putting equally or more active time in that, than AFK mining in Null or HighSec for 200M.
The income is about as passive as it gets. If you have even a glimmer of ability to optimize things, you can avoid touching a moon miner for a month or more. The size of the income so generated doesn't make the income less passive. Nice try cherry picking a dumb example, by the way.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:59:18 -
[324] - Quote
Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:1. Moon Mining is not passive income. Whoever says that must have a grave misconception of what it means to be passive. Doing a lot of hauling (fuel, goo to market) for some 200M profit per month on a regular R16 moon is not passive by any means. You are probably putting equally or more active time in that, than AFK mining in Null or HighSec for 200M.
The income is about as passive as it gets. If you have even a glimmer of ability to optimize things, you can avoid touching a moon miner for a month or more. The size of the income so generated doesn't make the income less passive. Nice try cherry picking a dumb example, by the way.
It is only a dumb example if you're speaking from the perspective of someone who is thinking in numbers of 20,40, 100 moons, because you have the possibilities to run as many. Touching it "once a month" doesn't make it more passive than undocking "once a month" to rat for 200M or mine for 200M with equal or less time involved. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2780
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:05:32 -
[325] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:1. Moon Mining is not passive income. Whoever says that must have a grave misconception of what it means to be passive. Doing a lot of hauling (fuel, goo to market) for some 200M profit per month on a regular R16 moon is not passive by any means. You are probably putting equally or more active time in that, than AFK mining in Null or HighSec for 200M.
The income is about as passive as it gets. If you have even a glimmer of ability to optimize things, you can avoid touching a moon miner for a month or more. The size of the income so generated doesn't make the income less passive. Nice try cherry picking a dumb example, by the way. It is only a dumb example if you're speaking from the perspective of someone who is thinking in numbers of 20,40, 100 moons, because you have the possibilities to run as many. Touching it "once a month" doesn't make it more passive than undocking "once a month" to rat for 200M or mine for 200M with equal or less time involved.
Again, you're cherry picking a low-value example to try and pretend like moon mining isn't passive. The passive or active nature of income is completely unrelated to the magnitude of income so generated.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Gaius Clabbacus
Basket of Deplorables
43
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:09:54 -
[326] - Quote
Querns wrote:Gaius Clabbacus wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:The POTENTIAL is there, but, given current citadel tactics everybody is simply going to put these to down time for vulnerability and at best you'll be ganking miners while its active.
The structure itself will end up entirely immune, which sucks because like or not hitting a moon miners is a fairly huge part in nullsec warfare, its one of those things that allow smaller entities to harass larger entities in a meaningful way, not just 'lol ganked ur hulk' Heartwarming to see that the mega-alliances still care for the little guy and are not just arguing for their self-interest. It is quite disingenuous to see him campaigning for a change that would let his alliance more easily destroy the infrastructure of a smaller alliance, isn't it?
It might actually make sense if the argument was for a structure at POCO price level and capabilities, while moving compression and reactions to Engineering complexes. |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:26:41 -
[327] - Quote
Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:1. Moon Mining is not passive income. Whoever says that must have a grave misconception of what it means to be passive. Doing a lot of hauling (fuel, goo to market) for some 200M profit per month on a regular R16 moon is not passive by any means. You are probably putting equally or more active time in that, than AFK mining in Null or HighSec for 200M.
The income is about as passive as it gets. If you have even a glimmer of ability to optimize things, you can avoid touching a moon miner for a month or more. The size of the income so generated doesn't make the income less passive. Nice try cherry picking a dumb example, by the way. It is only a dumb example if you're speaking from the perspective of someone who is thinking in numbers of 20,40, 100 moons, because you have the possibilities to run as many. Touching it "once a month" doesn't make it more passive than undocking "once a month" to rat for 200M or mine for 200M with equal or less time involved. Again, you're cherry picking a low-value example to try and pretend like moon mining isn't passive. The passive or active nature of income is completely unrelated to the magnitude of income so generated.
First, as I've shown you and you fail to find any counter-argument: Moon mining is not passive. I know you wish you could prove me wrong, because it is the base of all your following arguments, but no you can't. "Passive" would mean that you don't have to do anything or so little that it barely counts - which is not the case with moon mining. You have to source fuel, fuel your POS, haul fuel and goo to some market and sell that ****. You have to spend real and active time to get ISK out of that.
Second, you seem to not like my 200M example. Let me explain: R16 moons are far more common than some R64 moons which are anyway mostly un-attainable for 99% of EVE population. So, IF you are only happy speaking about R64 moons, you would not need to criticize the alleged "passive" nature of it, but because the it is far too easy to sit on it for too much of an income compared to other activities.
Simply forcing people to launch a mining fleet will not change a bit of that imbalance. It will only lead to Goonswarm Federation having a bit more income than some Lowsec Entities who naturally don't have a full mining outfit. Because: no mining upgrades possible, no Supers or Titans can be build in Lowsec, etcpp. So yeah, I get it, you are advocating for your very own interest, by pretending that you actually don't give a **** or that it would be good for EVE or even everyone.
How about this: Make Moon Mining Lowsec only. This would make Lowsec great again. (and a real good reason for mining fleets in lowsec) |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2781
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:39:14 -
[328] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote: First, as I've shown you and you fail to find any counter-argument: Moon mining is not passive.
Today's moon mining is extremely passive. You do a thing once a month. Putting up buy orders and sell orders is not strenuous.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
19
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:42:58 -
[329] - Quote
OK, so maybe this is just tears, but I've been trying to find an articulate way of making my point and so far failing
Passive, or semi-passive income is important to the game.
That's why you buy learning implants, why you plex alts, why you work your way up the political ranks....
So, one day you can earn decent isk with less effort because you've put in the legwork and you can stop ratting, mining, or scanning 6-7 hours a day to out-compete your peers and hostile neighbors. You now have time for organizational work, leadership activities, recruitment, and player development.
Otherwise, what is the difference between say ratting in a bc for 9m ticks and a carrier for 50m isk ticks? To replace the occasional loss, given the price difference, there you are still ratting 7 hours a day... or mining... or mining moonstuffs.
In different ways, moon mining (more passive) and running reaction POS's (kinda, sorta, not really passive) are just about the only way to scale up operations to your isk and time limits that can be done with JUST YOUR MAIN account.
Sure, u need cyno and trade alts, and some pi, or a good logistics structure, but you don't need to log into one alt, start your ten reactions, log out.. log into another alt, etc, etc. etc.
Your risk/reward is physical, sitting in space, vulnerable to destruction, and a PITA to move, so you'll twist nuts to keep your sov.
Conversely, with what is proposed, reacting will be a skill requiring a fraction of the infrastructure investment (one cit) with a limited number able to be run be one toon. So now you have to (like PI, T2 indy, multiblox mining) invest in characters to station spin and run reaction jobs
(or you have to invest in cheap miners alts to efficiently harvest your goo)
For reacting in particular, now your investment is hardly in space or vulnerable at all. It's all toons parked in cits w full assett safety. For moon mining, I'd suspect docking rights will be give to neutral npc corp alts that are granted docking rights. Undock, semi afk crush the field, redock, log out for a week. Who care if they die, they're in retrievers w no kb issues.
In either case, this is what I see. An effective end to the last scalable, profitable activity that doesn't require one plex a month per alt to scale up.
At least with plex available in much smaller chunks, you might be able to just activate your mining alts for a few days at a time to mop up big goo piles, just seems SOOO tedious and unnecessary. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2781
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:45:39 -
[330] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:At least with plex available in much smaller chunks, you might be able to just activate your mining alts for a few days at a time to mop up big goo piles, just seems SOOO tedious and unnecessary.
This is not the case; read the follow up blog. Game time will not be available in chunks smaller than 30 days.
I'm not sure why so many people think this. It was never going to happen, and is in fact not happening.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3171
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:49:03 -
[331] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts? |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2781
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:50:27 -
[332] - Quote
Common misconceptions ITT seem to revolve around the idea that individual players will be FORCED into mining by their alliance. This stems from the enshrined belief that moongoo = SRP. It doesn't; income = SRP. Moongoo is just one form of income. If your alliance is worth anything at all, they'll find new ways to fund SRP. If they can't, and SRP is important to you, consider a change.
Likewise, if your alliance tries to force you to mine, consider leaving. Democracy is omnipresent in Eve Online, but you have to vote with your feet, rather than with a ballot pen.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3914
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 20:59:07 -
[333] - Quote
Something I haven't seen addressed. Low sec alliances & defending their moon goo. While they certainly can shoot first, this will result in security status hits in low security space.
As a result (& for smoothing the road if any moon mining even if really inefficient in high sec) I propose that the field have an 'access list' and if you are not on that access list you get a suspect timer. This won't stop any ninja mining since someone still has to be there to shoot them anyway, but it means an alliance defending their refineries moon pull doesn't take sec status hits for doing so. |
Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
7
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 21:11:16 -
[334] - Quote
i wonder about the viability of prospect BLOPS fleets for moon mining with this operation. Is their yield too sh*t to be worth the effort, or would it be worth it for risk mitigation? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3253
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 21:23:03 -
[335] - Quote
Querns wrote:Common misconceptions ITT seem to revolve around the idea that individual players will be FORCED into mining by their alliance. This stems from the enshrined belief that moongoo = SRP. It doesn't; income = SRP. Moongoo is just one form of income. If your alliance is worth anything at all, they'll find new ways to fund SRP. If they can't, and SRP is important to you, consider a change.
Likewise, if your alliance tries to force you to mine, consider leaving. Democracy is omnipresent in Eve Online, but you have to vote with your feet, rather than with a ballot pen.
Can't wait for people whining about mining CTA tho. We know it will happen in some corp/alliance. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2782
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 21:30:40 -
[336] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Querns wrote:Common misconceptions ITT seem to revolve around the idea that individual players will be FORCED into mining by their alliance. This stems from the enshrined belief that moongoo = SRP. It doesn't; income = SRP. Moongoo is just one form of income. If your alliance is worth anything at all, they'll find new ways to fund SRP. If they can't, and SRP is important to you, consider a change.
Likewise, if your alliance tries to force you to mine, consider leaving. Democracy is omnipresent in Eve Online, but you have to vote with your feet, rather than with a ballot pen. Can't wait for people whining about mining CTA tho. We know it will happen in some corp/alliance.
Probably true. Garbage organizations are everywhere.
oh shit we're in one right nooooow
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Obsidian Blacke
Oberon Confederation
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 21:49:53 -
[337] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Something I haven't seen addressed. Low sec alliances & defending their moon goo. While they certainly can shoot first, this will result in security status hits in low security space.
As a result (& for smoothing the road if any moon mining even if really inefficient in high sec) I propose that the field have an 'access list' and if you are not on that access list you get a suspect timer. This won't stop any ninja mining since someone still has to be there to shoot them anyway, but it means an alliance defending their refineries moon pull doesn't take sec status hits for doing so.
The rocks don't belong to their corp. You can't own a rock....man. |
Obsidian Blacke
Oberon Confederation
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 21:52:17 -
[338] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:
In either case, this is what I see. An effective end to the last scalable, profitable activity that doesn't require one plex a month per alt to scale up.
How so. You can still make a corp/alliance, do all the organizational work you want, and tax your members for passive income. :p |
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:08:34 -
[339] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Something I haven't seen addressed. Low sec alliances & defending their moon goo. While they certainly can shoot first, this will result in security status hits in low security space.
As a result (& for smoothing the road if any moon mining even if really inefficient in high sec) I propose that the field have an 'access list' and if you are not on that access list you get a suspect timer. This won't stop any ninja mining since someone still has to be there to shoot them anyway, but it means an alliance defending their refineries moon pull doesn't take sec status hits for doing so.
eve should be more haotic not less it is because of the bunch of people wanting to control every aspect of this game - this game actualy sucks because they succed in thair plans completly. It must end or this game is dead, only a toy in hands of few very mighty people.
|
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:14:18 -
[340] - Quote
Punctator wrote:[quote=Nevyn Auscent]
eve should be more haotic not less it is because of the bunch of people wanting to control every aspect of this game - this game actualy sucks because they succed in thair plans completly. It must end or this game is dead, only a toy in hands of few very mighty people.
Yup better make it so max of 200 characters per alliance and fleet and lets do away with any kind of standings overlay outside of alliance. Lets make it so hard mechanically to blue anyone that nobody would want to. Then we'll have a chaotic EVE |
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:16:57 -
[341] - Quote
Fish Hunter wrote:Punctator wrote:[quote=Nevyn Auscent]
eve should be more haotic not less it is because of the bunch of people wanting to control every aspect of this game - this game actualy sucks because they succed in thair plans completly. It must end or this game is dead, only a toy in hands of few very mighty people.
Yup better make it so max of 200 characters per alliance and fleet and lets do away with any kind of standings overlay outside of alliance. Lets make it so hard mechanically to blue anyone that nobody would want to. Then we'll have a chaotic EVE
Fine by me; we have a workaround for no standings.
Why do you think CCP added the ability to set folks blue in the first place?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:23:31 -
[342] - Quote
Querns wrote:
Why do you think CCP added the ability to set folks blue in the first place?
I do not know, always assumed coalitions in space |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:24:36 -
[343] - Quote
Fish Hunter wrote:Querns wrote:
Why do you think CCP added the ability to set folks blue in the first place?
I do not know, always assumed coalitions in space Nope.
https://eveinfo.net/wiki/index~25.htm
You can use a portrait pack to differentiate between hostiles and friendlies. Groups with a portrait pack have a distinct advantage over those without, so CCP added standings to even the playing field.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Punctator
Shadow-Kill Aureus Alae
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:32:10 -
[344] - Quote
Querns wrote:Fish Hunter wrote:Punctator wrote:[quote=Nevyn Auscent]
eve should be more haotic not less it is because of the bunch of people wanting to control every aspect of this game - this game actualy sucks because they succed in thair plans completly. It must end or this game is dead, only a toy in hands of few very mighty people.
Yup better make it so max of 200 characters per alliance and fleet and lets do away with any kind of standings overlay outside of alliance. Lets make it so hard mechanically to blue anyone that nobody would want to. Then we'll have a chaotic EVE Fine by me; we have a workaround for no standings. Why do you think CCP added the ability to set folks blue in the first place?
i dont think they predict how large player structures will become. I think they do same mistakes calculating titans costs and now we have tones of titans. Mittani and others "lords" are the REAL cancer of this game. This game is realy the only one i know when new players are so awefull harased by old and mighty. There cant be something new in eve, because old "lords" may lose thair position, so lets destroy all using big toys from passive income or total control of t2 market. This is what realy brings eve to stagnation. CCP is just stupid but they learned somethink so who knows it may change.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:34:39 -
[345] - Quote
Punctator wrote:Querns wrote:Fish Hunter wrote:Punctator wrote:[quote=Nevyn Auscent]
eve should be more haotic not less it is because of the bunch of people wanting to control every aspect of this game - this game actualy sucks because they succed in thair plans completly. It must end or this game is dead, only a toy in hands of few very mighty people.
Yup better make it so max of 200 characters per alliance and fleet and lets do away with any kind of standings overlay outside of alliance. Lets make it so hard mechanically to blue anyone that nobody would want to. Then we'll have a chaotic EVE Fine by me; we have a workaround for no standings. Why do you think CCP added the ability to set folks blue in the first place? i dont think they predict how large player structures will become. I think they do same mistakes calculating titans costs and now we have tones of titans. Mittani and others "lords" are the REAL cancer of this game. This game is realy the only one i know when new players are so awefull harased by old and mighty. There cant be something new in eve, because old "lords" may lose thair position, so lets destroy all using big toys from passive income or total control of t2 market. This is what realy brings eve to stagnation. CCP is just stupid but they learned somethink so who knows it may change.
Link your freighter lossmail.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
FoxFire Ayderan
231
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 22:51:37 -
[346] - Quote
The way moon mining works sounds very cool.
|
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC Nefatari Union
86
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:00:49 -
[347] - Quote
...oh...OHHHH!!! USG ISHIMURA BABY #necromorph-infestation #stomp-everything |
Sky Marshal
Core Industry. Blades of Grass
145
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:07:40 -
[348] - Quote
Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote: First, as I've shown you and you fail to find any counter-argument: Moon mining is not passive.
Today's moon mining is extremely passive. You do a thing once a month. Putting up buy orders and sell orders is not strenuous. I really wonder how you make it work for a month, because even with a Gallente tower, I don't manage to get this number. Depending of the reaction, it can go between 11 days to a month (if you are happy with *Carbide reactions)... But it will be inefficient because it means more towers for each reaction, so more fuel and so less profit.
And as you are in a big alliance, you can afford to fill the import silos fully. A small alliance or an individual would take too much risk to do that, fill more than a week of raw products could be really dangerous because any attack would mean a big amount of ISK lost.
With a standard Caldari duo, you get more money because less fuel. But you need to go back each 4 days to retrieve the final reaction, as the silos can't store more than that. And if you don't want to take too much risks, one week of raws maximum.
So it is not so passive that you claim. It is passive for goons (and other big alliances).
Rowells wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts? If we follow this logic, market orders are passive income. CCP should nerf them. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:14:05 -
[349] - Quote
Sky Marshal wrote:Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote: First, as I've shown you and you fail to find any counter-argument: Moon mining is not passive.
Today's moon mining is extremely passive. You do a thing once a month. Putting up buy orders and sell orders is not strenuous. I really wonder how you make it work for a month, because even with a Gallente tower, I don't manage to get this number. Depending of the reaction, it can go between 11 days to a month (if you are happy with *Carbide reactions)... But it will be inefficient because it means more towers for each reaction, so more fuel and so less profit. And as you are in a big alliance, you can afford to fill the import silos fully. A small alliance or an individual would take too much risk to do that, fill more than a week of raw products could be really dangerous because any attack would mean a big amount of ISK lost. With a standard Caldari duo, you get more money because less fuel. But you need to go back each 4 days to retrieve the final reaction, as the silos can't store more than that. And if you don't want to take too much risks, one week of raws maximum. So it is not so passive that you claim. It is passive for goons (and other big alliances). Rowells wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts? If we follow this logic, market orders are passive income. CCP should nerf them.
Reactions are not the same thing as moon mining.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3914
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:23:57 -
[350] - Quote
Obsidian Blacke wrote: The rocks don't belong to their corp. You can't own a rock....man.
And nowhere have I said that they 'own' the rocks. The problem is without people going suspect they take a standings penalty for shooting someone to protect something they made. Because at the end of the day the asteroids for moon mining are actually player made. They put up a structure, keep it fueled & defended in order to get the field.
So they should be able to defend it without being penalised with standing losses in low sec for shooting ships. All the suspect status does is eliminate the standing penalty, well, and stop people fleeing into high sec and suddenly becoming immune 2 seconds later. |
|
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC Nefatari Union
86
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:27:06 -
[351] - Quote
...Hmmm after reading the dev blog. I have to say that I like the fact that you are making moon mining active mining with spawnable asteroids.
HOWEVER!
As far as I could see this structure... is prety much WORTHLESS in highsec and wormhole space other than it having... Slightly better refining when it's using refining rigs?
Unless it get some kind of use other than refining in high/WH space I dont think ANYONE is gonna use them there.
Which makes me IMMENSLY sad cause the drilling platform was the structure I looked forward to the most with its... Enriched material harvesting gameplay??? Sadly highsec wont be seing ANY of that gameplay... If only it was possible to have it spawn (Rare) ores in areas like highsec/WH space... Guess not... Gonna have to pass on this one... |
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1695
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:30:02 -
[352] - Quote
Quote: 32. Rumor mongering is prohibited.
Rumor threads and posts which are based off no actual solid information and are designed to either troll or annoy other users will be locked and removed. These kinds of threads and posts are detrimental to the wellbeing and spirit of the EVE Online Community, and can create undue panic among forum users, as well as adding to the workload of our moderators.
Removed a post and those quoting it for the above reason.
If you have any Reasonable belief a CSM, ISD, GM, and or a DEV is abusing their position, please file a support ticket Game Play support -> Rules and Policies -> Game Masters and ISD or you can email security directly.
ISD Max Trix
Lieutenant
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:30:49 -
[353] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Obsidian Blacke wrote: The rocks don't belong to their corp. You can't own a rock....man.
And nowhere have I said that they 'own' the rocks. The problem is without people going suspect they take a standings penalty for shooting someone to protect something they made. Because at the end of the day the asteroids for moon mining are actually player made. They put up a structure, keep it fueled & defended in order to get the field. So they should be able to defend it without being penalised with standing losses in low sec for shooting ships. All the suspect status does is eliminate the standing penalty, well, and stop people fleeing into high sec and suddenly becoming immune 2 seconds later.
You know, you finally had an idea that I agree with. I think that CCP should allow lowsec refinery havers to shoot thieves without a security status penalty. Keying it to the ACL works great.
I fear that it won't happen, though; it's a tall order, technically speaking.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
129
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:14:22 -
[354] - Quote
Slept on it read more and still a no for me. This is the gayest change ever to Eve. How anyone can be happy at needing to mine is beyond me. I personally manage reaction towers and i don't think this change is going to make the game exciting if anything it just made a dull activity even duller apart from a cool GIF showing a piece of moon being tractor beemed out of a planet. I mean WTF is that really the best Fozzie and the devs can come up with? |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
33
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:18:46 -
[355] - Quote
Rowells wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts?
So would you say taking a dump is active or passive? You press really hard and then relax and let gravity work for you... passive? Once you hit and release the flush and then the water and suction will do the rest... passive?
What about AFK Mining, AFK Ratting?
If you give me - in my R16 example - 200M for warping a few systems, getting fuel, warping back, fueling pos, waiting 10 minutes, taking goo, hauling goo to market, selling goo. Is it less passive then in your eyes if the Goo would be created once a month in 10 minutes when I am actually there?
There are things that require more or less activity, different kinds of activity, but they all do. There is no passive income. If in your personal view hauling, selling and caring about infrastructure is less active than flying a ship to (x,y,z) in space and start your auto-targeting something, well it might just be that you judge to your own preferences. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:21:46 -
[356] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote: There is no passive income.
Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Sky Marshal
Core Industry. Blades of Grass
145
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:39:33 -
[357] - Quote
Querns wrote:Reactions are not the same thing as moon mining. Oups sorry you are right, I thought I read reactions, my bad. Last time I check forums this late...
In an another note, I don't understand why the devblog mentions that some ice products will be required for reactions in the future. If it is really to compensate for the lower global fuel consumption, why not simply make the refinery modules use a big amount of fuel per hour ? If it remains like this, this requirement can help to reduce the impact on the price of ice products, but not for PI products who will go down. |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
33
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:44:27 -
[358] - Quote
Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote: There is no passive income.
Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income.
If you qoute me be fair enough to quote my entire text in which I explain why it is not passive.
Again: If you shoot a rat and it does not die immediately while you press your button, but you have to wait for your guns to cycle a few times - in your logic that would be passive income. Same for market orders, as someone else said: you would consider them passive income as well. As soon as you need to do something in order to get something, you are not passive.
But I understand that you neither can or want to follow up on that logic, because you just repeat the very same thing over and over again without being able to counter argue. You've made your point often enough, you're not interested in discussion. Please stop spamming, thanks. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:48:22 -
[359] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote: There is no passive income.
Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income. If you qoute me be fair enough to quote my entire text in which I explain why it is not passive. Again: If you shoot a rat and it does not die immediately while you press your button, but you have to wait for your guns to cycle a few times - in your logic that would be passive income. Same for market orders, as someone else said: you would consider them passive income as well. As soon as you need to do something in order to get something, you are not passive. But I understand that you neither can or want to follow up on that logic, because you just repeat the very same thing over and over again without being able to counter argue. You've made your point often enough, you're not interested in discussion. Please stop spamming, thanks.
You're splitting hairs for no gain. Moon mining is passive income. It just is.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3253
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:49:16 -
[360] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:Querns wrote:zluq zabaa wrote: There is no passive income.
Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income. If you qoute me be fair enough to quote my entire text in which I explain why it is not passive. Again: If you shoot a rat and it does not die immediately while you press your button, but you have to wait for your guns to cycle a few times - in your logic that would be passive income. Same for market orders, as someone else said: you would consider them passive income as well. As soon as you need to do something in order to get something, you are not passive. But I understand that you neither can or want to follow up on that logic, because you just repeat the very same thing over and over again without being able to counter argue. You've made your point often enough, you're not interested in discussion. Please stop spamming, thanks.
If I shoot a rat and it does not die and then I log off, it will not die alter. Your moon mining will still gather resources until it is full even if you get in a coma for a full week and can't log back in. |
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2783
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:49:45 -
[361] - Quote
Sky Marshal wrote:Querns wrote:Reactions are not the same thing as moon mining. In an another note, I don't understand why the devblog mentions that some ice products will be required for reactions in the future. If it is really to compensate for the lower global fuel consumption, why not simply make the refinery modules use a big amount of fuel per hour ? If it remains like this, this requirement can help to reduce the impact on the price of ice products, but not for PI products who will go down.
A single refinery will be able to host an arbitrarily large number of reaction RAM jobs for a static fuel cost. If there isn't a small amount of ice cost in a reaction, ice will slide further down the toilet as the massive usage from reaction POS evaporates.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
19
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 01:11:44 -
[362] - Quote
A single refinery will be able to host an arbitrarily large number of reaction RAM jobs for a static fuel cost. If there isn't a small amount of ice cost in a reaction, ice will slide further down the toilet as the massive usage from reaction POS evaporates.[/quote]
That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now
and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.
That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.
I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.
Call me CCP, we can shake on it |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2784
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 01:24:30 -
[363] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote: That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now
and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.
That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.
I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.
Call me CCP, we can shake on it
Refineries are significantly more expensive than POS. Do you really want to be on the hook for a structure several times the cost of a POS, that need to be rigged to be able to do things with any efficacy, for every reaction you want to do?
Including ice in the reaction blueprint maintains the ice use without requiring a hideous amount of outlay (and the majority of that outlay being non-recoverable.) It also adds a PLEX cost to reactions in the form of the PLEX needed to keep reaction alts alive. Today's reactor farms can be serviced by two accounts for a (theoretically) arbitrarily large farm. (Effort limits and system moon count notwithstanding.)
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 01:38:18 -
[364] - Quote
Querns wrote:Leo Augustus wrote: That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now
and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.
That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.
I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.
Call me CCP, we can shake on it
Refineries are significantly more expensive than POS. Do you really want to be on the hook for a structure several times the cost of a POS, that need to be rigged to be able to do things with any efficacy, for every reaction you want to do? Including ice in the reaction blueprint maintains the ice use without requiring a hideous amount of outlay (and the majority of that outlay being non-recoverable.) It also adds a PLEX cost to reactions in the form of the PLEX needed to keep reaction alts alive. Today's reactor farms can be serviced by two accounts for a (theoretically) arbitrarily large farm. (Effort limits and system moon count notwithstanding.) Where does the plex get inserted into the refinery? I am confused. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2784
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 01:39:40 -
[365] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Querns wrote:Leo Augustus wrote: That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now
and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.
That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.
I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.
Call me CCP, we can shake on it
Refineries are significantly more expensive than POS. Do you really want to be on the hook for a structure several times the cost of a POS, that need to be rigged to be able to do things with any efficacy, for every reaction you want to do? Including ice in the reaction blueprint maintains the ice use without requiring a hideous amount of outlay (and the majority of that outlay being non-recoverable.) It also adds a PLEX cost to reactions in the form of the PLEX needed to keep reaction alts alive. Today's reactor farms can be serviced by two accounts for a (theoretically) arbitrarily large farm. (Effort limits and system moon count notwithstanding.) Where does the plex get inserted into the refinery? I am confused. It doesn't go into the refinery, it goes into the subscriptions of the alts you use to start reaction industry jobs.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Lugues Slive
Diamond Light Industries
41
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 01:43:50 -
[366] - Quote
This design is fairly similar to the idea I had for the Drilling Rig when it was first mentioned.
My idea was to have a structure that was not linked to a moon, but would capture dwarf planets from beyond the solar system it is linked to. It would still take days to draw the dwarf planet to the structure, and it would still be broken down over time into mine-able asteroids. The resulting asteroids would contain ore/ice/moon goo that would normally be found in that systems security range, with the possibility of better.
If the product was closer to what I was thinking, then this could be used in WH and HS, it would just create asteroids of ore/ice in HS and ore and maybe ice/gas in WH.
It could introduce some interesting issues in HS where the miner density is greater and there is no easy way to defend your ore. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
19
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 02:37:44 -
[367] - Quote
I would rather invest the isk in refineries for each reaction even i they cost 3x as much as a large faction pos.... unless the rigs are disgusting
But as a general proposition, I'd pay or the refineries because I can scale up to 20 or 30 reactions on one toon.
Each morning I warp to all my towers and collect my reactions. It's the high point of my day unless we go on a roam and I fall bass ackward into a nice kill.
Right after collecting my reactions I start cycling through PI alts necesary to ffuel the towers. Log in, log out, in, out, in, out.. my smile fades and I hate my eve life.
I mean, it's a little more exciting t multi box industry... trying to time all your component builds to end at the same time on each toon so u can move on to ships, but even that gets old.
Now I think about having to cycle through at least 3 alts simply to run reactions and I'm really in a funk.
With POS on moons that have to be fueled, filled, emptied, onlined, offlined, all that... you're pretty much committed to developing a plan and running it or at least a week. 8.3 days in my case. In that time, prices fluctuate wildy.
Maybe now my mid level reactions are so valuable I rush them to hs. Maybe they tanked hard and I'm best off stashing it away as an input in a future reaction or saving for a t2 build.
Once reactions are moved into the standard industry interface, that all goes away. If I want to build an ishtar, instead of maximizing profit by building my own components, I automatically am going to go all the way back to buying base moon mats and running reaction one, reaction two, components, ships.
You'll buy the precise amounts spreadsheet says you need and the production process becomes far more tedious. Not more interesting, more complex, more risky... just flat out redundant.
So, for basic t2 production, you're running invention slots, copy slots, industry slots, and now refining slots? All for mods that under-perform faction built out of tritanium?
If there's a compelling reason to put reaction runners out of business, I'm all ears... seriously. I just hate to see a cool niche profession flushed for no compelling reason. I don't have expertise in drug manu, but I suspect that becomes a station spinning job farmed to alts now as well. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2785
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 02:42:55 -
[368] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote:I would rather invest the isk in refineries for each reaction even i they cost 3x as much as a large faction pos.... unless the rigs are disgusting
But as a general proposition, I'd pay or the refineries because I can scale up to 20 or 30 reactions on one toon.
Each morning I warp to all my towers and collect my reactions. It's the high point of my day unless we go on a roam and I fall bass ackward into a nice kill.
Right after collecting my reactions I start cycling through PI alts necesary to ffuel the towers. Log in, log out, in, out, in, out.. my smile fades and I hate my eve life.
I mean, it's a little more exciting t multi box industry... trying to time all your component builds to end at the same time on each toon so u can move on to ships, but even that gets old.
Now I think about having to cycle through at least 3 alts simply to run reactions and I'm really in a funk.
With POS on moons that have to be fueled, filled, emptied, onlined, offlined, all that... you're pretty much committed to developing a plan and running it or at least a week. 8.3 days in my case. In that time, prices fluctuate wildy.
Maybe now my mid level reactions are so valuable I rush them to hs. Maybe they tanked hard and I'm best off stashing it away as an input in a future reaction or saving for a t2 build.
Once reactions are moved into the standard industry interface, that all goes away. If I want to build an ishtar, instead of maximizing profit by building my own components, I automatically am going to go all the way back to buying base moon mats and running reaction one, reaction two, components, ships.
You'll buy the precise amounts spreadsheet says you need and the production process becomes far more tedious. Not more interesting, more complex, more risky... just flat out redundant.
So, for basic t2 production, you're running invention slots, copy slots, industry slots, and now refining slots? All for mods that under-perform faction built out of tritanium?
If there's a compelling reason to put reaction runners out of business, I'm all ears... seriously. I just hate to see a cool niche profession flushed for no compelling reason. I don't have expertise in drug manu, but I suspect that becomes a station spinning job farmed to alts now as well.
Man, you are a monument to objectively incorrect Eve playing. "High point of my day." Amazing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rena'Thras
Strategic Insanity FUBAR.
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 03:41:36 -
[369] - Quote
I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?
.
It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.
After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?
I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.
Surely that isn't the intention...?
One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 08:30:54 -
[370] - Quote
Rena'Thras wrote:I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?
.
It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.
After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?
I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.
Surely that isn't the intention...?
One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs.
Yes, that's the intention. |
|
Layla
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 09:32:04 -
[371] - Quote
IGÇÖve been in this game continuously since the beginning and have spent a LOT of time doing moon mining and reactions. IGÇÖm currently the manager of a sizeable moon mining and reaction operation in null sec. These are my comments:
1.Dynamic moons that run out of materials slowly would be good for the game. The current moons are too static. A new role for explorers is available here.
2.The idea of pulling a chunk of the moon towards the drilling platform to create a mineable debris field sounds great. Visually exciting.
3.The idea that this field then needs to be mined in a conventional way with mining barges, etc I am not so happy with. Null-sec alliances have widely spread moon mining operations at present. Moving mining fleets around from one moon to another is not going to be practical. The idea only works if you think that corps/alliances only have a very few moons. Null-sec alliances have dozens of moons.
4.In my experience there is a broad separation between mainly pvp players and miners. You wonGÇÖt get many pvpers into mining barges. They will hate it. But most of the null sec moons feed the coffers of pvp alliances to allow them to make war, which creates the demand for industry.
5.I would suggest that you need to have some middle ground to allow corps that own moons to have an ability to continue to manage moons with relatively few personnel.
6.May I suggest the use of mining drones launched from the drilling platforms and controlled by a player to mine the debris fields. This operation would yield lower resources than a full-on mining barge fleet. Drones could be attacked in the usual ways and use of area-based weapons from the drilling platforms would also affect/destroy said mining drones.
7.May I also suggest that the yields from the moon debris fields are varied in content, much like conventional asteroid belts. Currently each moon usually has only one, maybe two, useful products. Each moon debris field would have multiple resource asteroids in varying quantities. So a moon might primarily yield asteroids containing hafnium, but with a mixture of other asteroids in the debris field yielding other moon goo in much smaller quantities.
8.May I also suggest that the distribution of moon goo throughout the universe is spread more evenly, especially the regional moon goos, such as titanium, cobalt, tungsten, etc. Null-sec alliances shouldnGÇÖt have to go to empire to be able to produce their ships. They should be able to have the resources in null sec to operate almost independent of hisec.
I am looking forward to these exciting changes and ready to adapt our operations to them. I hope you will consider these suggestions.
|
Tialano Utrigas
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
102
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 09:44:04 -
[372] - Quote
Good post.
Now is that a POS bleating I here? |
Blossom Rivers
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 09:49:26 -
[373] - Quote
Argument against Mining Ledger
The owner already knows when the goo is going to come out of orbit. They already have an advantage of controlling when it'll be ready and its size, they have a refinery to back them up in a fight, and the home-ground advantage.
Owners of refineries should be made aware of what has happened (missing ore), but they should send a scout in to determine, how many (numbers = very important!!!), and exactly who is doing it to set up a counter initiative, and not be given valuable intel on a silver platter for free with no active game-play involved. They should be putting a scout in the system or have a spy to gather intel.
There should NOT be a mechanism in game for tracking non-friendly players, we ousted that system through the contact management change were players can no longer be notified of a non-friendly player coming online, letGÇÖs not bring that back with the mining ledger, i.e. tracking specific non-friendly players and corporations locations and actions at no cost/effort.
The ledger is obviously an idea brought about by a relatively few players who run mega alliances who want to have absolute control over tech 2 resources and deny the majority of players access to these resources, rather than compete for them in an ongoing manner that gives others a fighting chance.
I thought the idea behind these structures was to turn refineries into an area where players can actively compete for resources. But if you going to just hand everything to the refinery owner on a silver platter anyway + free intel and all, whatGÇÖs the point?
|
Blossom Rivers
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 10:06:18 -
[374] - Quote
Arguments on location of moon ore field
Owner alliances shouldn't be able to solely rely on the weapons of the Refinery to remove the enemy from the field. Moon goo should spawn literally just within range of the refineries weapons, or on the border (part-in part-out of range), so that owner players can't just rely on the station to blow up enemy ships. The owners should have the advantage of retreating back closer to the refinery if needed for refinery support (within weapon range), but would have to have PVP ships to actually remove an enemy threat/mining force permanently.
That way an enemy mining fleet can sit just outside the refineries weapon range and mine a good portion of the ores if no-one is active in the system (active siphoning of enemy resources).
If an enemy decides to bring sniper PVP fit ships they can deny the owner its resource by firing on the owners mining ships and still stay outside of the refineries weapon range, attempting to tackle though would bring them in weapon range, of course the owner can do exactly the same, but has the safety net of being of being located within weapon range of the refinery so are relatively free to warp back to the refinery, tether, heal up and return to the fight, but thatGÇÖs the advantage of owning the refinery isn't it.
If an enemy does decide to chase they will be in range of the refineries defences which will act as a strong deterrent. Command destroyers and MJD's could become an extremely useful tool in these types of engagements, and should create for some really interesting fights. Why? Because nothing should be entirely safe, this is EVE, nothing is safe! A Refinery should not be an 'I win' button when it comes to Moon goo, the convenience of storage/hangers/fitting/reactions, etc. and defence within reason is enough of an advantage.
Give the small corporations a fighting chance at least. (Imagining small gang of prospects ninja mining a large alliances moon goo = instant content). Surely the Mega Alliances have hogged these resources to themselves for long enough, give the smaller corporations a chance at turning a profit from this resource as well.
Yes the Large alliances can come with their capitals and blast away someone else's refinery to put their own up, but itGÇÖs about time they get actively involved in these systems both in terms of resource gathering and small scale PVP. Not only do large alliances have to win a system, but they have to be actively involved in that system. You can use your capitals to 'win' space, but you also have to be actively involved in the space you own.
Many large alliances are using their large capital fleets to take more than their fair share of space, just because smaller corporations don't have capitals shouldn't exclude them from low/null, they should still be able to be active from an industry perspective, as well as a PVP perspective. This model lets them do that, it also limits mega alliance from taking more systems than they can actually actively use just so they can put up moon drills.
This would definitely be a step towards helping smaller corporations get involved by giving GÇÿa fighting chanceGÇÖ at competing for these resources. |
Salvos Rhoska
2552
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 10:44:17 -
[375] - Quote
Little guy gets kicked in the nads again.
Reverse-Malcanis' Law in effect.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 10:53:14 -
[376] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Little guy gets kicked in the nads again.
Reverse-Malcanis' Law in effect.
Well, duh - EVE is real. |
Gary 0ldman
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 10:57:38 -
[377] - Quote
This is the best change in a long time! Power to the carebears!
Personally I'd like to have this availeble in wh space too.
The people I see complaining here, is the guys that are controlling the moongoo. |
Pretentious Knob
Silhouette Services
6
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 10:59:43 -
[378] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:I see internal diplomatic incidents waiting to happen. Once mined, there's no way to force someone to pay you a fee. This literally is asking for drama, and not the good kind, but the players/corps being kicked from their alliances kind due to the actions of the few kind.
First, might I suggest causing the structure to put a "barrier" along the belt which when crossed will warn that a % fee based on the value will be deducted from the player's wallet (based on the owner's settings) at the end of every cycle. If they can't pay the fee the cycle fails and that's that. Allow this to be bypassed by a new form of the "siphon" units which allow entry undetected of the anchoring player. Entries show within the mining log as "unknown" but still have it log the stolen goods. These new deployables should be 1 shot deals which cannot be picked up and last for their duration maybe an hour, up to a day.
Last point, simply due to the number of moons in existence, and the unknown size of the belts created (I'd assume along the lines of what we see in a small belt anomaly, this could take a lot of time even if you stagger them. The task of mining the materials will be daunting. Perhaps consider allowing the structures to still passively mine the material over the 1-2 week cycle that it takes for the next rock to be hauled up. That way once the new rock is there, the previous one has been cleared.
This also allows for a constant amount of materials to continue to enter the market, but allows for players to speed up the process without actually effecting volume.
Thankyou for your suggestion but please no. I feel that the process of mining will be a pain in the butt anyway but having to deploy a structure to hide you or not pay tax is just not a good idea. Ultimately it should be a free for all. If Corps/Alliance dont want to have the ore stolen, then log in and keep eyes on it.
I would like to expand on your idea of the ore being mined passively, maybe give the refinery the ability to deploy drones to grab the ore. They can be set for auto cycle where they just stay in space collecting the ore, but can be destroyed by other players which will then send a notification that there something going on. |
Pretentious Knob
Silhouette Services
6
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 11:19:49 -
[379] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote:Please for the love of god dont keep the current distribution of moon goo - there are areas of space that are so lacking and the weird distribution of certain elements is daft.
I'd suggest starting from scratch:
Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Not saying massive screw up the ballancing but say if a belt gives you 1,000,000 units of goo once refined you get:
Atmospheric Gases x 200,000 Evaporate Depositsx 200,000 Hydrocarbonsx 200,000 Silicatesx 200,000 Cobaltx 25,000 Scandiumx 25,000 Titaniumx 25,000 Tungstenx 25,000 Cadmiumx 15,000 Vandiumx 15,000 Platinumx 15,000 Chromiumx 15,000 Caesiumx 7,500 Technetiumx 7,500 Hafniumx 7,500 Mercuryx 7,500 Promethiumx 2,500 Dysprosiumx 2,500 Neodymiumx 2,500 Thuliumx 2,500
you can then play with individual moons so a current Dyspro moon could give 25,000 per belt.
its a rough idea I grant you but please dont leave goo like it is now
OMG yes, can someone please give this man a spot on the CSM. This idea allows everyone to get involved and get their hands on this moon goo/ore without it being monopolised by the big boys/girls. I think it has been mentioned that the spread of the different ore can be expanded where if there is a primary item then the numbers can be adjusted accordingly.
Well done, thinking of all the playing group and not just one side. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14824
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 11:30:24 -
[380] - Quote
Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today.
Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature. However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
|
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
180
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 11:52:26 -
[381] - Quote
Fozzie what happens to the mining jobs on the First and 2nd reinforcement timers respectively? |
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
180
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 11:54:59 -
[382] - Quote
I'm all for a new type of mining laser/drones + skills for these new type of rocks. Additional character depth/choices along with the opening of new markets for those modules is a good thing. |
Pretentious Knob
Silhouette Services
6
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:02:55 -
[383] - Quote
Have had a quick review of the comments and think this is heading in the right direction to break things up.
1. Have all types of moon goo available on moons but just at various levels depending on the moons (pre patch)
2. I think all moons in EVE Universe should have some sort of goo that can be mined.
3. By making this a active process it will help reduce big alliances/corporations from having a monopoly. Can you imagine mining ops all over New Eden. Means groups will have to be corordinated, and I do think it will give the small group a chance to get in the action.
4. Great news about keeping current ships mining. I don't think we need special lasers. Moons where made out of asteroids banging into each other.
5. However long the cycle is for the chunk to be extracted and broken down in minable asteroids, can I suggest that if not mined the ore stays in space. So after first week (if weekly cycle) there is ore floating around the Refinery, if not mined second week makes this field bigger, third week even bigger, then fourth week is added but the first weeks worth of ore starts to disappear. Can you imagine warping to a refinery and seeing this massive ore field around the structure that is just waiting to be harvest. That would be exciting.
6. To assist with the passive income (but not to much) have drones that can be deployed from the structure to slowly mine away the chunks of ore. These field will get done quicker if players join in.
7. Please do not introduce a system that notifies the corp who has beens tealling their ore. Maybe they get to know how much is missing but they should have eyes to catch the dirty thief.
You are making this a active mechanic to collect the stuff, so make sure it is an active mechanic to find out who is taking your moon goo/ore.
Looking forward to the direction this might go and how it affects EVE. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2785
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:07:32 -
[384] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
I probably should just come to expect this, but I'm quite happy to see attention continuing to be paid in regards to capital docking. This is a great compromise.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
180
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:13:56 -
[385] - Quote
I agree with some of the points the above.
All moons should be mine-able: remove moons that can't be as you don't need them for POS' anymore. There's so many moons and it's a waste to try and search/scan through them all.
Agree with having all types of goo available on all moons in varying amounts. Just like an asteroid belt has all sorts of different rocks. You extract your big disk, drill it, and out comes a littany of different rock types. The benefits to this is that even small corps/alliances in crap space will have some decent income potential, rather than needing that rare dyspro moon to make profit. Also helps solve the problem of moons that don't even cover the cost of fuel because their goo isn't valuable. |
mkint
1672
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:20:32 -
[386] - Quote
Rena'Thras wrote:I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?
.
It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.
After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?
I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.
Surely that isn't the intention...?
One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs. CCP has made it crystal clear that small groups are no longer welcome in EVE. If that bothers you, you are welcome to unsub. EVE has become a marketing driven game, and if you don't N+1, you don't contribute to their marketing and are thus disposable.
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
12
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:24:18 -
[387] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
But .. what about the most important question of all?
Can we blow up the chunk moving to the refinery so we can harvest bitter tears? |
Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4060
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:27:14 -
[388] - Quote
Rowells wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts?
pretty much similar to market orders not hiding when you log off, industry jobs don't pause, sp farming doesnt pause when you are offline, if it was a true passive income then isk would just go straight into the wallet without any work after the initial setup.
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
81
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:39:06 -
[389] - Quote
mkint wrote:Rena'Thras wrote:I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?
.
It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.
After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?
I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.
Surely that isn't the intention...?
One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs. CCP has made it crystal clear that small groups are no longer welcome in EVE. If that bothers you, you are welcome to unsub. EVE has become a marketing driven game, and if you don't N+1, you don't contribute to their marketing and are thus disposable.
Small structures have always been listed as personal items rather than corp. They exist, they are called mobile depot and other such things. Mediums are pretty affordable even for individuals in a personal corp, they just aren't hugely defendable if somebody decides to attack them. Then again neither are larges unless you have a fleet to back you up.
|
Lustig Allas-Rui
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:49:48 -
[390] - Quote
The Dev blog says that existing refining Rigs will be removed.
Where will they end up? I'm particularly asking regarding opportunities of theft in badly managed corps. |
|
Momiji Sakora
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
80
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:55:09 -
[391] - Quote
How about Fracking barren moons to generate ordinary ore anoms? |
Tribal Trogdor
Better Off Red Unspoken Alliance.
40
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 12:56:58 -
[392] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
Please do something with this as you release the refineries. Value of towers and their fittings used on rxn towers is going to tank as people swap their massive rxn chains out for these new structures. People will either have to get out of the tower game early to avoid massive investment value loss, or end up getting very little back if they don't. Either way it would screw with the T2 market as they either exit, or can't reinvest into the new structures when they come out. |
Sean Jester
Drunk with Industry Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:05:07 -
[393] - Quote
Maybe giving Deep Core strip miners an added role could fit better with their everyday usage. Like, level 4 needed.
After all, we only need them for the mercoxit roid, which is... I don't know... limiting?
Maybe 1 type of dedicated crystals for all the moon resources, or a dedicated set of crystals too, like for the rest of roids.
Just my 2 cents. |
Avatoo Lorr
Coiled Spring Inc
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:10:54 -
[394] - Quote
Will the mining of the moon goo count towards a systems industrial ADM seeing as it is now going to be an active endeavour? |
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:23:57 -
[395] - Quote
Quote:Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
This expansion is a pretty good chance for a couple of interesting additions:
1) Deep core mining skill and deep core miners to gain another use 2) A 3rd t2 mining frigate that specializes in moon goo (can fit covert ops cloak for ninja bridging purposes) 3) Moon goo rigs for exhumers & barges
To be honest I don't care if the same ships & equipment is used or not, I'm just throwing it out there that this is a chance to further specialize moon goo mining. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2786
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:25:08 -
[396] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Rowells wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts? pretty much similar to market orders not hiding when you log off, industry jobs don't pause, sp farming doesnt pause when you are offline, if it was a true passive income then isk would just go straight into the wallet without any work after the initial setup.
Splitting hairs. Don't be willfully obtuse.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1913
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:26:09 -
[397] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Querns wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Querns wrote: Nah. Just don't be lazy and you'll be fine.
You guys even have an AUTZ corp--- oh, wait, no.
We're actually pulling 100+ guys for most AUTZ ops after Dansara spent a few months rebuilding it, the point of my post is to keep the moon miner viable as a fight generator and avoid the stupidity that comes from the current garbage of '3 timers and a week of time for a citadel with no fuel in it at all thats not defended' Man, you guys must have hated Dominion sov if you can't handle three or more timers for a thing. Given the rate that your alliance (and others) slaughter rorquals in our space, one would think you'd see the fight potential in these things. The POTENTIAL is there, but, given current citadel tactics everybody is simply going to put these to down time for vulnerability and at best you'll be ganking miners while its active. The structure itself will end up entirely immune, which sucks because like or not hitting a moon miners is a fairly huge part in nullsec warfare, its one of those things that allow smaller entities to harass larger entities in a meaningful way, not just 'lol ganked ur hulk'
I tend to agree with your view. I simply hate the aids that short vulns have provided and railed against this prior to cits launching. I feel like CCP got the balance completely backwards and Keeps shoulda had Medium vuln windows and Mediums the Keeps.
CCP rebalancing windows to favor larger structures and generally a bit larger vuln times would be a good thing.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Creator of Burn Jita
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
Aleverette
Peoples Liberation Army Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:35:40 -
[398] - Quote
So... RIP lowsec and NPC nullsec moon mining?
These changes would seriously decrease t2 material outcome. |
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
97
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:38:10 -
[399] - Quote
Aleverette wrote:So... RIP lowsec and NPC nullsec moon mining?
These changes would seriously decrease t2 material outcome.
We don't know what the new output will be. Based on what we saw with the initial Rorq buff, do you honestly believe the new moon goo drop rate will be significantly lower than current levels? Especially since Rorqs can mine the new moon goo? |
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
197
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:39:05 -
[400] - Quote
In response to the Q&A from Fozzie (thanks fo answering questions btw) How will siphons be reimbursed? (I'm assuming this will be happening.) I'm asking because i want to know if i should be using up the stack i have right now or wait for them to be phased out. |
|
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1895
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:49:00 -
[401] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Since moon mining, especially the R64 side of things, is pretty much the highest tier of mining available, I think it should have at least some specialization. Doesn't need different skills for every single ore type (that would be a long long list). But maybe split it up according to the moon's quality (R4, R8, R16, R32 and R64). The five tiers would fit perfectly in a single skill.
- Moon Harvesting - Ability to harvest resources from moon deposits. Level 1 unlocks a moon mining laser and the crystal for R4 moons. Each subsequent level unlocks an additional crystal for each type of moon goo, with level 5 being required for R64.
- Advanced Material Reprocessing - Ability to reprocess mined moon ore, similar to existing reprocessing skills.
- Moon Mining Drone Operation - Ability to use special moon mining drones, similar to existing drones.
- Moon Mining Drone Specialization - Unlocks Moon Mining Excavator drones, similar to existing excavators.
And of course all the skills related to reactions and stuff. Having a separate set of modules for moon mining keeps it nice and clean, and gives it a natural progression. Not to mention it will be easier to balance the T2 economy from a development point of view, should that become necessary.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:49:07 -
[402] - Quote
Zanar Skwigelf wrote:Quote:Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open. This expansion is a pretty good chance for a couple of interesting additions: 1) Deep core mining skill and deep core miners to gain another use 2) A 3rd t2 mining frigate that specializes in moon goo (can fit covert ops cloak for ninja bridging purposes) 3) Moon goo rigs for exhumers & barges To be honest I don't care if the same ships & equipment is used or not, I'm just throwing it out there that this is a chance to further specialize moon goo mining.
Do you really want to limit newer players from taking part in moon mining by requiring deep core miners. Now if you want to limit specialty crystals to deep core miners I am ok with that. |
ZeRonin
Deutsche Vulkan Synergy of Steel
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 13:55:22 -
[403] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Let's make them an intel tool instead.
If placed near a refinery, they give a more or less precise time of the moon goo explosion, so you can form a fleet and try to get a bit of the cake. Meta ones are harder to scan and/or more precise with the explosion time. |
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
97
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 14:01:26 -
[404] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:
Do you really want to limit newer players from taking part in moon mining by requiring deep core miners. Now if you want to limit specialty crystals to deep core miners I am ok with that.
Deep core mining doesn't take that long to skill into, and the release is far enough away that you can get it before it goes live. Don't be lazy.
TigerXtrm wrote: Moon Harvesting - Ability to harvest resources from moon deposits. Level 1 unlocks a moon mining laser and the crystal for R4 moons. Each subsequent level unlocks an additional crystal for each type of moon goo, with level 5 being required for R64. Advanced Material Reprocessing - Ability to reprocess mined moon ore, similar to existing reprocessing skills.
I completely agree with a new reprocessing skill. We have one for ore and ice. It would be more consistent to have one for the new rocks as well. |
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
245
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 14:06:21 -
[405] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses.
T3 Gasses? Dedicated drug moons. I do like the sound of that. It'd be fantastic for ninja venture fleets.
'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4
|
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:12:28 -
[406] - Quote
Zanar Skwigelf wrote:[quote=Fredric Wolf]
Do you really want to limit newer players from taking part in moon mining by requiring deep core miners. Now if you want to limit specialty crystals to deep core miners I am ok with that.
Deep core mining doesn't take that long to skill into, and the release is far enough away that you can get it before it goes live. Don't be lazy.
First off I already have the skill don't attack me because you can't be bothered to look and see that alpha clones do not have deep core mining on their skill tree. How about you not being lazy with your quick attacks |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3171
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:14:54 -
[407] - Quote
Sky Marshal wrote:Rowells wrote:zluq zabaa wrote:Moon mining is not passive. So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts? If we follow this logic, market orders are passive income. CCP should nerf them. That jump from passive to nerf bat wasn't logical at all. |
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
865
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:17:43 -
[408] - Quote
Momiji Sakora wrote:How about Fracking barren moons to generate ordinary ore anoms?
CCP Fozzie wrote: Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature.
This would be a good compromise.
Don't give us moon goo we don't need that space drama and risk adverse wardeccers and Nullsec botters. If anything, do this but give use ICE fields!
For the art department, give us something that ******* looks like space refineries, not random useless towers! |
Gray Mare
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:33:27 -
[409] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today (including Rorquals).
Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature. However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
so no t2 strip miners............. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3171
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:34:22 -
[410] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:So would you say taking a dump is active or passive? You press really hard and then relax and let gravity work for you... passive? Once you hit and release the flush and then the water and suction will do the rest... passive? Active. Shitting up forums without realizing it might be considered passive though.
zluq zabaa wrote:What about AFK Mining, AFK Ratting? Still active, even if the input requirements are lower. I you are not logged in and present, no progress is made. Arguments can be made its passive, but no progress is made when logged off.
zluq zabaa wrote:If you give me - in my R16 example - 200M for warping a few systems, getting fuel, warping back, fueling pos, waiting 10 minutes, taking goo, hauling goo to market, selling goo. Is it less passive then in your eyes if the Goo would be created once a month in 10 minutes when I am actually there? That would be active by your choice, not design. I can set up PI to do a similar thing, but it will still very much be considered a passive income source by majority of people you ask.
zluq zabaa wrote:There are things that require more or less activity, different kinds of activity, but they all do. There is no passive income. If in your personal view hauling, selling and caring about infrastructure is less active than flying a ship to (x,y,z) in space and start your auto-targeting something, well it might just be that you judge to your own preferences. You want to know what truly separates active from passive income in great majority of situations? Ask yourself: Is progress toward the task completion still generated after pilot involvement has entirely ceased?
Not everything falls into the straight and narrow, but here's a few examples of you're typical passive/active incomes (by design not choice):
Passive - Planetary Interaction - Industry/Research Jobs - Moon Mining - Market buy/sell orders (not immediate orders)
Active - Mining - Ratting (including missions/incursions/sleepers/etc) - Hauling - Exploration
The first list includes activities that do not require a pilot to be active or even online for progress to be made. The second list has activities that completely cease once the pilot logs off. No further generation or progress is made. |
|
Sylvia Kildare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:39:09 -
[411] - Quote
JTK Fotheringham wrote:Will we be able to set a tax on these jobs? While we're talking about taxes - will ore compression become a taxable feature?
Will there be a limit of one refinery per moon, or will an alliance be able to set up say half a dozen, and have one extracting a chunk of moon per day?
A) if you take the survey they want us to take, there's a question in there about making compression taxable. I hope they leave it free, though, as a consumer of free compression services (and cheap refining/reprocessing, which is more worth paying for).
Or if not... could the Orca get the ability to compress ore or ice in its ore hold, pllllz?
B) I believe I read that while refineries can be built int he same areas with the same restrictions/distance limitations as citadels and engineering complexes, only one refinery per moon-goo-having moon may turn on its moon drill at a time. Presumably after the moon chunk is turned into a belt, that refinery could shut down its moon drill and another refinery within range of the moon could have a turn?
ArmyOfMe wrote:Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks.
Perhaps they should start recruiting some, then.
Also, I have a feeling lowsec corps and alliances probably have more industrialists/miners in their ranks than they realize. Some may just do it on their alts or not talk about it much since they figure their corpmates are all PVP-only folks. Everyone assuming that about each other and then it turns out they all have a secret mining habit. heh.
I knew a couple incursion boxers who had a few toons in lowsec corps and enjoyed both PVP and industry in low/null, so... they're out there. Just gotta find 'em. |
Trixi Laminer
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:39:35 -
[412] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:RIP alliance srp for small-medium size alliances (not like free ships did anything in the way of content anyways, right guys?)
Also RIP t2 in general... incoming rebirth of t3 meta
you know t3 geting hit with rebalancing pass this summer right? |
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
74
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:43:36 -
[413] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Could they not be used as a personal moon mining array, bringing up say one asteroid instead of an entire field? |
AOAm Adranas'Lira
Atreidun Order
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:48:48 -
[414] - Quote
I like the sounds of this.
My only comments would be I understand not diluting the T2 resources pool down by adding mineable moons all over high sec. Risk verses rewards must stay balanced. I do think it would be interesting though see drills being deployed somehow in high sec though. If it is introducted it should be restricted to 0.5, perhaps 0.7 systems or lower. I also came up with two other options for deployment.
1. Moon mining activity spawns standard ores for collection (Veldspar, Plagioclase, etc). Maybe some mid-grade ores. I realize this doesn't fall in line with the idea of moon goo, but just a thought. 2. If moon products were introduced into high sec, they need to be lower value, and lower qualities than would be present else where in space (null, etc). Important to keep risk/reward in check. This is were usage in lower security system would be important; so they wouldn't pop up everywhere.
Thanks for the info Fozzie. |
Zanar Skwigelf
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
98
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:50:41 -
[415] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:
First off I already have the skill don't attack me because you can't be bothered to look and see that alpha clones do not have deep core mining on their skill tree. How about you not being lazy with your quick attacks
Let's try this again.
T2 production is one of the few industry areas that actually have some decent skill requirements to produce stuff. High skill requirements are a good thing, because it limits the number of people that choose to pursue that niche of EVE.
Do I care that alpha's can't use deep core equipment? no.
Do I care if CCP changes it so alpha's can use deep core equipment? no.
The skills and equipment required for a good moon goo operation should be based on how specialized the other areas are. Even gas harvesting has its own modules and skills.
Whether or not alpha's can participate should not lead the decision on how to set up the system. The system should be set up, and then alpha access can be determined afterwards. Does that mean alpha's gain deep core mining? maybe, maybe not.
|
Infamous en Distel
Phoenix Generation 13
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:56:45 -
[416] - Quote
I have not been able to read the whole forum post, so maybe this is redundant in some ways.
As people have mentioned, a fair portion of the process of creating moon materials is automated, for theory's sake 1 person could operate and manage 5-10 moon mining control towers. In this new system, that number could flip to now need 5 people to maintain the same production rate per day per moon that the current system operates at.
If there is a concern over lack of player involvement that could disrupt the production of T2 materials, could a mining module for the refinery itself be considered?
This module would cost 1 High slot, and burn down the capacitor of the refinery so it could operate for 15 minutes / hour or so (don't know off the top of my head what the recharge rate on the capacitor would be). Burning the Cap on the tower would come with the inherent disadvantages of not being able to use its defensive modules as long as initially planned.
The aim would be to make the module capable of mining enough resources to maintain 40-50% of the current daily production rates, through the power of 1 person and a moderate time investment, on a belt that takes 24H to spawn.
I really like the idea of turning moon mining into an operation more players can be involved in, but the types of miners I know of are very risk averse and may not be interested in mining in lowsec. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 15:57:50 -
[417] - Quote
Zanar Skwigelf wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:
First off I already have the skill don't attack me because you can't be bothered to look and see that alpha clones do not have deep core mining on their skill tree. How about you not being lazy with your quick attacks
Let's try this again. T2 production is one of the few industry areas that actually have some decent skill requirements to produce stuff. High skill requirements are a good thing, because it limits the number of people that choose to pursue that niche of EVE. Do I care that alpha's can't use deep core equipment? no. Do I care if CCP changes it so alpha's can use deep core equipment? no. The skills and equipment required for a good moon goo operation should be based on how specialized the other areas are. Even gas harvesting has its own modules and skills. Whether or not alpha's can participate should not lead the decision on how to set up the system. The system should be set up, and then alpha access can be determined afterwards. Does that mean alpha's gain deep core mining? maybe, maybe not.
T2 production shouldn't change what skills are used but right now to harvest moon goo you need anchoring lvl 3 that is not at all skill intensive. |
DaReaper
Net 7 Cannon.Fodder
2957
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:02:10 -
[418] - Quote
Just going to add, as i mentioned on slack, please make the timer for when the drill makes the belt publicly available. I live in a wormhole and plan to try and ninja moon goo, so it would be really handy to warp tot he structure and see if the belt is coming soon or if i should close my hole and move on.
That and as a former sov holder it would be nice to not have to answer the question of 'hey reap, when will the belt spawn?' from alliance members daily.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
Eve For life.
|
tarkathian
We Are Down Syndrome inPanic
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:02:46 -
[419] - Quote
so, by adding a huge time sink for miners(this is not a complaint), will you then boost the harvester drone mining amount again to compensate for the loss of time mining normal minerals? as this is going to mean a lot less "normal" minerals being harvested, especially if you have hundred's of moon roid belts being mined every week in some of the larger allianes? |
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
865
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:17:47 -
[420] - Quote
Infamous en Distel wrote:I have not been able to read the whole forum post, so maybe this is redundant in some ways.
As people have mentioned, a fair portion of the process of creating moon materials is automated, for theory's sake 1 person could operate and manage 5-10 moon mining control towers. In this new system, that number could flip to now need 5 people to maintain the same production rate per day per moon that the current system operates at.
If there is a concern over lack of player involvement that could disrupt the production of T2 materials, could a mining module for the refinery itself be considered?
This module would cost 1 High slot, and burn down the capacitor of the refinery so it could operate for 15 minutes / hour or so (don't know off the top of my head what the recharge rate on the capacitor would be). Burning the Cap on the tower would come with the inherent disadvantages of not being able to use its defensive modules as long as initially planned.
The aim would be to make the module capable of mining enough resources to maintain 40-50% of the current daily production rates, through the power of 1 person and a moderate time investment, on a belt that takes 24H to spawn.
I really like the idea of turning moon mining into an operation more players can be involved in, but the types of miners I know of are very risk averse and may not be interested in mining in lowsec. The whole point is to make moon goo not AFK anymore, and Fozziesov for people to actually use the space!
Nullsec income needs to be less AFK orientated! |
|
Somethingski
Bunnyhop and Bears
12
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:32:19 -
[421] - Quote
Hi if i have 3 refinery's on a moon with one miner active and someone else puts up 3 refinery's and then kills my active one are we going to clickspam in the other 5 refinery's and let RNGeesus decide who gets the miner active? currently if you kill a pos you can hold grid and put a new one up but i assume that wont be the case with the new structures. |
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
19
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:42:24 -
[422] - Quote
Where are all these supposed miners coming from?
I've never seen a nul or ls corp or alliance turning down applications cuz they just have too many miners.
Plus no one likes dying over and over, so rental or noob miners would need protecting. So now, half your alliance has to babysit them or be posted up spotting for them three gates out.
In that case, you might as well just plex a handful of mining toons, plex them in npc corp, allow them docking access, and let them die whenever. Ship losses and plex expenses get calculated into material sell price.
Quite possibly the fuel requirements for a clone bay will be added to moon product prices as well, cuz seriously, who wants to fleet in barges. JC in mining alts from one moon mega alliance holds to the next and mop up the goo on a schedule.
I see where everyone's heart is in the right place. It's just not gonna shake out how you'd like.
So now the moon guru and the miining director's positions are more closely aligned and the really big boys no longer have to bother dropping cits to get content.
Hell, maybe they don't even have to bother maintaining moon ops at all. Why bother when they can simply drop in on neighbors at harvest time, brush aside your fleet, and mine the goo while you pay the fuel bill.
Go ahead and try to start a fight with them over it.. caps will just drop and crush u. These guys are dropping and letting cits die undefended half the time simply in search of content, on the off chance they'll have people online and kicking ur as* is convenient for them at that moment. If not, they just lose the cit and care about as much as I would losing a gecko.
Plus, this looks like a pretty permanent situation, given that the existing system was going for over a decade.
Mining is all well and good. I used to freaking love it. I know a lot of people enjoy it. Give it two or three years, trust me, the thrill wears off.... all the way off.
I'm just not seeing the upside to significantly increasing the mining demand and demand for dedicated miner toons. Most, not all, look forward to the day they can graduate from mining and do something a bit more active. With all this new mining required, there's no end in sight, for any of us.
Providing a little spice and opportunity for the >10M SP crowd to get some cool goo... I get that, I support that. Still there has to be a better mechanic to allow for that than mining.
Please find a way that refinery cits can continue to soak up the reactions passively while still leaving the floating asteroids, chunks, dust, whatever, exposed to theft... Like ESS-style theft.
Stealing ship lands, activates "fracking" or "jackhammer" module, fills up on unrefined promethium, and tries to make it home alive. This would be fantastic for wh'ers.
The huge alliances feel the pinch some on distant moons, cuz the one thing they can't do is be everywhere at once. Perhaps some far-flung r64's and 32's are eventually conceded owing to attrition and lack of profitability. I guarantee you they'll find the time to be there though if anyone brings Rorq's, Orcas, or even a dozen exhumers on field. They freaking live off of those tears.
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:58:59 -
[423] - Quote
Leo Augustus wrote: I guarantee you they'll find the time to be there though if anyone brings Rorq's, Orcas, or even a dozen exhumers on field. They freaking live off of those tears. a dozen properly set up exhumers are not to be trifled with haha |
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
29900
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:00:33 -
[424] - Quote
Every update that have to bring more conflict, can also bring more blues to your side.
Every part of a game helps to tell a story =ƒôò
Where is Angry CONCORD guy when you need him
Osprey =ƒÜÇ
GëíGïüGëí GÖÑ
|
zyalino
Stardust Heavy Industries ChaosTheory.
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:04:06 -
[425] - Quote
will the moon goo asteroids chunk be placed next to the citadell? because, if yes, i understand that mining ops will take place within docking or at least tethering range. will the mining, or locking, of asteroids generate a weapons timer?
with the removal of siphons, do i understand right, that there won't be a way to steal from reactions anymore?
whatever
|
Wiera Yezalel
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:07:02 -
[426] - Quote
Will it affect resources available for planetary interaction?
|
Cngaar Aya
The Library Association Wormlife
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:14:51 -
[427] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: [...] However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses.
For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
As a video game designer for my day job, I really empathize with not wanting to take too big a bite for this.
That being said, it doesn't seem like that far a stretch to allow this mechanic to work with barren moons for ice and/or regular ore, and this would immensely revitalize wormhole space both by making mining ops practical...and giving hunters more things to hunt.
The lack of regular ore belts and ice anoms only ever in shattered holes made sense in an earlier era when there was the dream of making wormhole space not settleable, but that ship has long since sailed, and instead wh space has become a haven for smaller groups trying to carve out a place for themselves in the EVE universe. |
Mr Bowers
Coalition Alliance Corporation Cohortes Triarii
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:27:06 -
[428] - Quote
Nothing I would say. Goons are doing a good job building up supers . They protect their miners for next year or so and will have a better cap force then NC and PL. With them letting people fight in the thunder dome they will have ton of peepons.
Lunarstorm95 wrote:Querns wrote:Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle. However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed. Im interested in what a goon has to say about this, how does a med/small alliance that doesn't have a full mining wing expected to mine several moons, enough to keep up with SRP and infrastructure/fuel cost? Alliances like goons are gana benefit so much from this patch, you can hardly say "Even I, a goon, think this should happen"
|
Maximus Andendare
The Scope Gallente Federation
926
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:30:29 -
[429] - Quote
Quote:Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Have you guys considered using Deep Core Strip Miners as the moon mining lasers? It'd help the Deep Core mining laser market as well as make training Deep Core Mining skill more rewarding to train. Using normal strip miners and mining lasers are better left to asteroids.
Step onto the battlefield, and you're already dead, born again at the end of the battle to live on and fight another day.
>> Play Dust 514 FREE! Sign up for exclusive gear today! <<
|
Mr Bowers
Coalition Alliance Corporation Cohortes Triarii
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:35:12 -
[430] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today (including Rorquals).
Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature. However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
I'm sorry about not all moons need to bare T2 materials. This is eve and let's add a bit more to the table here. So place a different resources on the moons at the same time. I'm sure their a ton of players wanting to do this in empire. If it can't be t2 moon stuff then give us something else with this update. We all know once this feature hits you wont touch it for some time again.
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2789
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 17:42:25 -
[431] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:Querns wrote:Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle. However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed. Im interested in what a goon has to say about this, how does a med/small alliance that doesn't have a full mining wing expected to mine several moons, enough to keep up with SRP and infrastructure/fuel cost? Alliances like goons are gana benefit so much from this patch, you can hardly say "Even I, a goon, think this should happen"
With alternate sources of funding.
Goonswarm Federation, currently, uses 0% of its money earned via moongoo for SRP. I know, because I'm the guy who turns all the moongoo we mine into cash, and I am the one who decides how that particular chunk of money is spent. None of it goes to SRP.
If we, the least capable and worst alliance in Eve Online: Noted Space-themed Spreadsheet, can manage it, so should you and yours.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo
320
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 18:00:45 -
[432] - Quote
Rena'Thras wrote:I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?
.
It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.
After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?
I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.
Surely that isn't the intention...?
One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs.
You are absolutely right! But theyGÇÖre not going to happen. As far as CCP is concerned the GÇÿsmallGÇÖ sizes are already in game and are the deployable like the mobile depot. What they are announcing is what we are getting. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6757639#post6757639
I wish it wasnGÇÖt so, I had high hopes for the new structures and hoped they would bring more granularity to the landscape. Instead they have removed rungs from the ladder at the bottom. And itGÇÖs not like the CSM or any of the regular GÇÿvoicesGÇÖ CCP listens too gives a crap about small scale groups or gameplay either. And for the ones that do, GÇÿsmallGÇÖ groups seem to be defined as over a hundred, not the many 1-30 man corps out there currently utilizing POSGÇÖs. Half the forum warriors from large groups will just yell GÇÿadapt or dieGÇÖ (which should just be GÇÿadapt or unsubGÇÖ) all while ignoring that the problem is options to adapt are being taken away from small groups with the new structures. ItGÇÖs hard to GÇÿadaptGÇÖ when your choices are becoming more limited from what you had before.
Hell CCP didnGÇÖt even know that there was even any negative feelings towards these they are so disconnected with the small corp community. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6747090#post6747090
They REALLY needed to do a round table or something with smaller groups, but the fact they never did shows their level of concern is zero. Hell, I predict they will instead point to supper rich 1% indy guy who showers Mercs with banking ISK to keep him alive as GÇÿproofGÇÖ everyone can use these while the not so rich 20 man corp who had a POS and now wantGÇÖs to build a home/base/indy startup will be told to just GÇÿuses someone elseGÇÖsGÇÖ. Just look at FozzieGÇÖs reply on this thread about removing POSGÇÖs.The things that he is concerned about are not mobility for small groups, viable income for them or even the barrier to entry. It was all GÇÿcyno generatorsGÇÖ and ways for big guys to move caps.
CCP has raised the bar to structure ownership/gameplay significantly (all while marketing them to GÇÿeveryoneGÇÖ), and have taken many of the financial niches that small groups use to keep up and handed them over to the big boys by default now. Just look at reactions. Right now there is kinda a soft upper limit to how many reactions a large scale/med operation can do based on how many POSGÇÖs the owners/logistic guys feels like dealing with, putting up, fueling, and managing (which is all a pain). But after these come out that limit disappears since there will be no limit to the amount of jobs per structure. So things where a small crop could buy the raw materials off the market and run some reactions at a no value moon to fill a gap in the market, or drug production are going to be gone since all production will be out of fewer of these run by larger groups (since they themselves will be able to fill those gaps on alts without the multiple POS hassle).
This is all great for the large scale industrialist, and the large groups needed the changes these structure are brining (I support most of the changes), but it really screws the little guy. Just like everything else about the new structures. And yet while with each new structure a larger part of the player base is feeling left out of CCPs vision for the game, CCP is really unwilling to even acknowledge it let alone talk about it with the small groups community. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 18:13:22 -
[433] - Quote
Manssell wrote:[quote=Rena'Thras]I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
This is all great for the large scale industrialist, and the large groups needed the changes these structure are brining (I support most of the changes), but it really screws the little guy. Just like everything else about the new structures. And yet while with each new structure a larger part of the player base is feeling left out of CCPs vision for the game, CCP is really unwilling to even acknowledge it let alone talk about it with the small groups community.
Is it so bad that CCP implements stimuli for team play as an integral part of participation dependancies? Is it really so bad that they introduce much more subtle and healthier progression encouragements even across gameplay niches and game segments?
One of the most common issues in the past when population went up was that ultimately it crashed harder than the peak grew because of quite a few reasons, a very notable one being a lack of triggers (if you will) for players to increase the number of connections between them and the pace of discovering encouragements/requirements for them. Another such issue was that once rooted people barely moved on or beyond the segment they ended up in.
I know, you raise valid points which CCP also consider carefully. But they also need to consider the overall health of population development in general terms. Sure, sometimes in some places the bar is raised, but it raises it in such a manner that the age old fundamental principles rooted in economics of scale compensate very smoothly for those raised bars.
People don't even need to be in the same corporation, I've seen systems by now where people make team based connections regardless of organisation/identity.
Look, I'm sorry, but the little guy could get screwed much much worse. With the concept as is, at least he gets the choice to feel something or not. Proverbially speaking, obviously. Where it comes to solo play, sure, structures might not be it for that. Then again, not far from Amarr there's a few systems where some solo players run their own structures (citadel, ec's, pos). They have a little market between them, they team up with others, individual and corporate. They do their thing, yet they still make connections and thus get the use of such things for their own enjoyment.
Yeah, it can be tough for the little guy. EVE is real, so no surprise there. But unlike in the past, he's not getting shafted. CCP has upped the ante, but while creating room for the little guy in very interesting manners.
|
Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic FUBAR.
19
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 18:30:16 -
[434] - Quote
[quote=
CCP has raised the bar to structure ownership/gameplay significantly (all while marketing them to GÇÿeveryoneGÇÖ), and have taken many of the financial niches that small groups use to keep up and handed them over to the big boys by default now. Just look at reactions. Right now there is kinda a soft upper limit to how many reactions a large scale/med operation can do based on how many POSGÇÖs the owners/logistic guys feels like dealing with, putting up, fueling, and managing (which is all a pain). But after these come out that limit disappears since there will be no limit to the amount of jobs per structure. So things where a small crop could buy the raw materials off the market and run some reactions at a no value moon to fill a gap in the market, or drug production are going to be gone since all production will be out of fewer of these run by larger groups (since they themselves will be able to fill those gaps on alts without the multiple POS hassle).
This is all great for the large scale industrialist, and the large groups needed the changes these structure are brining (I support most of the changes), but it really screws the little guy. Just like everything else about the new structures. And yet while with each new structure a larger part of the player base is feeling left out of CCPs vision for the game, CCP is really unwilling to even acknowledge it let alone talk about it with the small groups community.[/quote]
Exactly what I've been trying to say. The limiting factor on pos's (or cits) is what makes running reactions a way to make a living. Hundreds of alts running reactions = fractional margins. It's handing that whole segment of the game to station traders and others that never undock.
Also makes basic t2 manu incredibly tedious. building slots, copy slots, invention slots, and now reaction slots too?
T2 was interesting because it required non-mine-able mats and you had to be inventive. Now it's all just different flavors of ore, bought and hauled from Jita.
There was always a mild SP barrier to entry into t2, but the real barrier was the complexity, logistics, and relationships required to build profitably. You might even invest in reaction towers to churn out finished reactions you used a lot of. Now u JF to Jita, consult your spreadsheet, buy the precise volumes needed of ice, standard minerals, mined moon mins and jf home and start cycling through alts and running jobs in the standard indy UI. Or you milk the local miners for mats at 85% of Jita buy cuz they don't have a jf and u won't work cheap.. lol. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
172
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 18:33:49 -
[435] - Quote
The people actually asking for new skills must have a bone in the injector market. That's all new skills or new ships with new requirements have already shown to encourage. There is no delay or gradual shift anymore, it's just inject and be perfect. I mean, if I were CCP I'd do it simply because more injector usage means more extractor and plex sales. But as a player I say screw that, just give additional uses to the already niche deep core mining skill. Hell, you can even attach the use of R-4/8/16/32/64 crystals to each level if you really wanted. |
ReK42
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
70
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 18:52:19 -
[436] - Quote
- I like the idea of a new reprocessing skill for the moon materials but don't do it unless you pre-seed the skill book and give people enough time to train it to 5 before release. If you don't do that there will be a gap where suddenly everyone is stockpiling the raw material until they can refine it perfectly.
- Similarly, a new mining skill seems good but tie it to new T2 mining crystals. Newbros in their Ventures should be able to take part in this corp based activity without having to specialize into it too far.
Other than the already talked about reinforcement mechanics there's one other major issue with citadels that really needs addressing. By putting so much of the cost of these structures into the rigs and making the rigs so specialized at the smaller sizes CCP have effectively killed small group/solo industrialism.
I do capital production (not supers). Currently I use one high sec POS to do research and ore compression. The results of this get shipped to null sec where I do capital production inside several engineering complexes. On the null sec side there are already 3 complexes required: a Sotiyo/Azbel with T1 rigs for hull production (because T2 is so expensive), a Raitaru with T2 rigs for refining and capital component production and another Raitaru with T2 ME rigs for equipment, fighters and T2 components. With the refinery changes that's now adding a fourth structure in null sec and the high sec POS would need to be split out into two structure (assuming compression won't be available on Raitarus).
All of this adds up to 6 structures, each with 3-5b worth of rigs, to do the job I used to be able to do with one small POS and an outpost. Granted, the industrial bonuses in null sec are quite a bit nicer than they were then but it doesn't change the fact that there is now an absolutely massive startup cost. This completely prices small/new corps out of the industrial game. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3173
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 19:07:37 -
[437] - Quote
Will the new moon-roids (we have a name yet?) be compressible? And if yes, will the effective compression allow the same amount of transport as today or will it become more efficient (in terms of m/3 per moon mat)? |
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
491
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 20:01:51 -
[438] - Quote
Cngaar Aya wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: [...] However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses.
For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release. As a video game designer for my day job, I really empathize with not wanting to take too big a bite for this. That being said, it doesn't seem like that far a stretch to allow this mechanic to work with barren moons for ice and/or regular ore, and this would immensely revitalize wormhole space both by making mining ops practical...and giving hunters more things to hunt. The lack of regular ore belts and ice anoms only ever in shattered holes made sense in an earlier era when there was the dream of making wormhole space not settleable, but that ship has long since sailed, and instead wh space has become a haven for smaller groups trying to carve out a place for themselves in the EVE universe.
Given that planets are what are barren or ice or plasma, etc. not moons exactly, I'd love to see this brought to wspace in this way. Allow barren planets to be fracked for ore and ice planets to be fracked for ice. This would naturally limit the number of resources available in wspace because planets are less numerous than moons and give wspace access to this mechanic without upsetting the balance of materials for T2.
|
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development Sev3rance
148
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 20:15:40 -
[439] - Quote
Is there any concept art available for these Refineries yet? |
HarlyQ
harlyq syrokos investment station Goonswarm Federation
129
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 20:31:22 -
[440] - Quote
Start stockpiling moon materials boys because people in lowsec wont mine moons anywhere near as much as current POS mechanic. |
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2789
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 20:34:13 -
[441] - Quote
HarlyQ wrote:Start stockpiling moon materials boys because people in lowsec wont mine moons anywhere near as much as current POS mechanic.
What, you think we won't make up the difference?
You don't think YOU'LL make up the difference, alone? :V
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
cutthroat kane
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 22:07:28 -
[442] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
Is there any plan to introduce a structure that replaces the ability to house (even a single) dread/carrier for the cost of a ship maintenance array? |
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 22:38:05 -
[443] - Quote
cutthroat kane wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
Is there any plan to introduce a structure that replaces the ability to house (even a single) dread/carrier for the cost of a ship maintenance array? Probably not... What a nightmare that would be. |
McBorsk
Multispace Technologies Inc Yulai Federation
68
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 22:51:45 -
[444] - Quote
We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. Let the chunks be completely random, with a higher chance of the good stuff if you have a large structure/t2 rig etc. If we don't all have to run to jita, that'd be great. |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 22:59:51 -
[445] - Quote
McBorsk wrote:We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. ..............
If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics.
With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
McBorsk
Multispace Technologies Inc Yulai Federation
68
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 23:02:30 -
[446] - Quote
Marcus Tedric wrote:McBorsk wrote:We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. .............. If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics. With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse.
I'm okay with that! |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 23:14:12 -
[447] - Quote
Perhaps not - but 80+% of EVE would be...
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
81
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 23:37:43 -
[448] - Quote
I see in the devblog that you will be uninstalling all of the reprocessing rigs so that people have the option of reinstalling them. This is a good move! However since you are giving an inch I'm going to ask for a mile
Can you please uninstall all rigs on a structure that has a reprocessing rig on it? Chances are that the entire structure will be replaced by a refinery and it would be nice to be able to just reuse all of the rigs once we're done placing the new refinery. The old structure will in many cases be surplus to requirements at this point and be unanchored. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2789
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 01:10:39 -
[449] - Quote
McBorsk wrote:We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. Let the chunks be completely random, with a higher chance of the good stuff if you have a large structure/t2 rig etc. If we don't all have to run to jita, that'd be great.
Nah. Regional moongoo is good, and gives highsec a chance to play.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Baldin Tarmain
B T C
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 05:15:03 -
[450] - Quote
1) As a small moon/reaction corp. Income will disappear without a fleet of miners.
2) Some form of tax/percentage of moongoo taken within a specified range of the refinery would go a long way to helping small corps recoup some of the loss without a fleet. Part of the field could lie outside of that range so ninjas could still ply their trade.
3) Will Asteroid mining volume drop because they'll be busy mining what used to be automated?
4) What will be vulnerability be?
|
|
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
33
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 05:42:33 -
[451] - Quote
Rowells wrote:[quote=zluq zabaa]... Passive - Planetary Interaction - Industry/Research Jobs - Moon Mining - Market buy/sell orders (not immediate orders)
Active - Mining - Ratting (including missions/incursions/sleepers/etc) - Hauling - Exploration
The first list includes activities that do not require a pilot to be active or even online for progress to be made. The second list has activities that completely cease once the pilot logs off. No further generation or progress is made.
You list things that are all active, each of them. You have to be active for PI just as you have to be active for current Moon Mining, just as you have to be active for Hauling or Mining (well not so much actually) and you agree on that. If you do not compare the Time Investment vs. Profit in ISK for each of these activities your list stays pretty much worthless. |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
33
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 05:44:13 -
[452] - Quote
Mr Bowers wrote:Nothing ap force then NC and PL. With them letting people fight in the thunder dome they will have ton of peepons. I would say. Goons are doing a good job building up supers . They protect their miners for next year or so and will have a better c Lunarstorm95 wrote:Querns wrote:Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle. However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed. Im interested in what a goon has to say about this, how does a med/small alliance that doesn't have a full mining wing expected to mine several moons, enough to keep up with SRP and infrastructure/fuel cost? Alliances like goons are gana benefit so much from this patch, you can hardly say "Even I, a goon, think this should happen"
Querns even admits it. He profited in the past and now he doesn't want anyone else to profit the same way he had. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3175
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 06:57:53 -
[453] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:You list things that are all active, each of them. You have to be active for PI just as you have to be active for current Moon Mining, just as you have to be active for Hauling or Mining (well not so much actually) and you agree on that. If you do not compare the Time Investment vs. Profit in ISK for each of these activities your list stays pretty much worthless. My PI chain is currently running while I'm not logged in. Care to explain how I'm active right now? |
Sigras
Conglomo
1109
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 10:59:34 -
[454] - Quote
mkint wrote:Rena'Thras wrote:I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:
WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?
.
It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.
After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?
I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.
Surely that isn't the intention...?
One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs. CCP has made it crystal clear that small groups are no longer welcome in EVE. If that bothers you, you are welcome to unsub. EVE has become a marketing driven game, and if you don't N+1, you don't contribute to their marketing and are thus disposable. Dude, this change is like, the opposite of that... This change finally gives smaller groups a way to subvert and fight back against the large juggernauts. Little by little, bit by bit, disrupted moon mining operation by disrupted moon mining operation.
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1109
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 11:06:46 -
[455] - Quote
McBorsk wrote:Marcus Tedric wrote:McBorsk wrote:We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. .............. If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics. With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse. I'm okay with that! Luckily you dont speak for all of us because being ok with that is idiotic! |
X4m
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
147
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 11:11:31 -
[456] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today (including Rorquals).
.
The rich, who can give protection, will become even richer. The poor are still poorer. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3920
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 11:19:35 -
[457] - Quote
Marcus Tedric wrote: If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics.
With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse.
Unless you know, HS actually got it's own self sufficiency. Because right now, Null is the only self sufficient area in the game since CCP gave it all the low ends, breaking their own idea of interdependent areas. The only issue Null currently faces is the fact moon minerals are regional, and that's always been bad design and is likely to change at some stage. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2789
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 11:21:28 -
[458] - Quote
zluq zabaa wrote:Mr Bowers wrote:Nothing ap force then NC and PL. With them letting people fight in the thunder dome they will have ton of peepons. I would say. Goons are doing a good job building up supers . They protect their miners for next year or so and will have a better c Lunarstorm95 wrote:Querns wrote:Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle. However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed. Im interested in what a goon has to say about this, how does a med/small alliance that doesn't have a full mining wing expected to mine several moons, enough to keep up with SRP and infrastructure/fuel cost? Alliances like goons are gana benefit so much from this patch, you can hardly say "Even I, a goon, think this should happen" Querns even admits it. He profited in the past and now he doesn't want anyone else to profit the same way he had.
Many, many people have profited from passive moongoo mining. I said that because, out of everyone in the game, we have the most to lose from this change, yet we champion it anyway.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2789
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 11:22:55 -
[459] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Marcus Tedric wrote: If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics.
With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse.
Unless you know, HS actually got it's own self sufficiency. Because right now, Null is the only self sufficient area in the game since CCP gave it all the low ends, breaking their own idea of interdependent areas. The only issue Null currently faces is the fact moon minerals are regional, and that's always been bad design and is likely to change at some stage.
Incorrect -- nullsec is quite reliant on highsec for mexallon, foreign ice, and faction loot (and deadspace loot via central market hubs) as well.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
868
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 14:18:08 -
[460] - Quote
Basil Vulpine wrote:I see in the devblog that you will be uninstalling all of the reprocessing rigs so that people have the option of reinstalling them. This is a good move! However since you are giving an inch I'm going to ask for a mile Can you please uninstall all rigs on a structure that has a reprocessing rig on it? Chances are that the entire structure will be replaced by a refinery and it would be nice to be able to just reuse all of the rigs once we're done placing the new refinery. The old structure will in many cases be surplus to requirements at this point and be unanchored. Which would kill almost everything in production...
(it's not a terrible idea!) |
|
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
868
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 14:26:38 -
[461] - Quote
Baldin Tarmain wrote:1) As a small moon/reaction corp. Income will disappear without a fleet of miners.
Then recruit miners... (#1 skills extracted is mining and reprocessing skills. Looks like Injectors will see a nice bump soon!)
2) Some form of tax/percentage of moongoo taken within a specified range of the refinery would go a long way to helping small corps recoup some of the loss without a fleet. Part of the field could lie outside of that range so ninjas could still ply their trade.
Nope, that's what the new Mining Platform logs are for. You do the math and collect the ISKies!
3) Will Asteroid mining volume drop because they'll be busy mining what used to be automated?
Of course, the whole point of this change is to remove AFK ISK generation from the RMTers.
4) What will be vulnerability be?
Following the Vulnerability times of previous Structures, large. Enough to prevent Time Zone tanking...
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 14:47:27 -
[462] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:.......... Unless you know, HS actually got it's own self sufficiency............
I don't think you understand EVE and particularly its economy very well - if at all........
Without the HS produced ships and modules going to Null (and to a somewhat lesser extent LS) - the HS Mining and Production economy would fall to pieces.
Yes - there are those 'WoW in Space' guys who would happily just run missions occasionally, given that Ratting Isk is simply printed at will - but not a great deal else.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
82
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 17:41:27 -
[463] - Quote
Sigras wrote:McBorsk wrote:Marcus Tedric wrote:McBorsk wrote:We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. .............. If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics. With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse. I'm okay with that! Luckily you dont speak for all of us because being ok with that is idiotic!
How so? People would still stay in the safety of HS running missions afk mining etc. it would just mean if you wanted to get rich, you'd have to go where the risk is there. |
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
292
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 18:06:10 -
[464] - Quote
Is it possible to have moon mineral resources depleat and respawn in other locations over an extremely slow progression. Ie a planet will replenish x mineral over a period over time, representing the advancement of technology able to extract out of previous useless places. Ie now we are able to extract oil out of tar pits, and fracking of old wells. Also the crashing of asteroids into the moons, like PI but slow growth rates and larger deposits to mine.
Will the refineries have to scan the surface like PI to pull up sections of moon to mine?
This will keep the map in transition for the giants, and leave open space for smaller groups. IE Goons mine out cloud ring moons completely of r16 minerals and decide to move to delve just to feed their industrial engine. 6 months later they move back cloud ring once the moons have replenished, unless the local who moved in kept the moons depleted to prevent their moons from becoming attractive.
Also can refineries be able to jump. So after 1 moon is empty it can take 1 week to prep the station to jump. This would once again allow limited nomadic life style.
Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2790
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 18:24:52 -
[465] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:Is it possible to have moon mineral resources depleat and respawn in other locations over an extremely slow progression. Ie a planet will replenish x mineral over a period over time, representing the advancement of technology able to extract out of previous useless places. Ie now we are able to extract oil out of tar pits, and fracking of old wells. Also the crashing of asteroids into the moons, like PI but slow growth rates and larger deposits to mine.
Will the refineries have to scan the surface like PI to pull up sections of moon to mine?
This will keep the map in transition for the giants, and leave open space for smaller groups. IE Goons mine out cloud ring moons completely of r16 minerals and decide to move to delve just to feed their industrial engine. 6 months later they move back cloud ring once the moons have replenished, unless the local who moved in kept the moons depleted to prevent their moons from becoming attractive.
Also can refineries be able to jump. So after 1 moon is empty it can take 1 week to prep the station to jump. This would once again allow limited nomadic life style.
The idea that we'd follow moon goo like this is fantasy. We'd just stay put and wait for the moongoo to come back, if your vignette was made real.
Moongoo just isn't that important to income any more.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 18:57:01 -
[466] - Quote
Querns wrote:Gevlin wrote:Is it possible to have moon mineral resources depleat and respawn in other locations over an extremely slow progression. Ie a planet will replenish x mineral over a period over time, representing the advancement of technology able to extract out of previous useless places. Ie now we are able to extract oil out of tar pits, and fracking of old wells. Also the crashing of asteroids into the moons, like PI but slow growth rates and larger deposits to mine.
Will the refineries have to scan the surface like PI to pull up sections of moon to mine?
This will keep the map in transition for the giants, and leave open space for smaller groups. IE Goons mine out cloud ring moons completely of r16 minerals and decide to move to delve just to feed their industrial engine. 6 months later they move back cloud ring once the moons have replenished, unless the local who moved in kept the moons depleted to prevent their moons from becoming attractive.
Also can refineries be able to jump. So after 1 moon is empty it can take 1 week to prep the station to jump. This would once again allow limited nomadic life style.
The idea that we'd follow moon goo like this is fantasy. We'd just stay put and wait for the moongoo to come back, if your vignette was made real. Moongoo just isn't that important to income any more.
Nah, you wouldn't if CCP ever were to do it properly. Any mechanical prime focus is easy to ride out, unless the feature set had a transient relation between organisational economics (taxation), demographics (activity) and subsets of geo-economics related to resource depletion/migration models (effectively introducing a non-behaviour based concept of entropy).
If CCP were ever to deviate from their historic focus on the mechanical approach (to instigating, guiding and limiting behaviour) that would be interesting. Fortunately for current organisational models they still hold on to that (yes, easy buttons to push really), so mechanisms provide boundaries and cause behaviour to follow, as opposed to the other way around (which, admittedly, would be more in line with the original emergent dynamic concept, and actually is what was directly responsible for the high retention in the first 3-4 years as well as demographics creating its own room - if I remember Oveur's old fanfest discussions correctly).
Right now it's only behaviour that provides entropy, so I can understand it when CCP says that this is sufficient. I guess I'd like it if it wasn't just that - if only because this slowly but certainly is compensated for with the exact same organisational models everywhere. I suppose in some ways this is why I can understand people (particularly those in lowsec) who don't feel fully comfortable with the current concept as presented in the devblog, because it does put them on the same paths of choice/consequence as null.
It's a case of progression paths for player organisation really, rather than a matter of resources and whether we use forks or fingers for them. In the long run it isn't healthy for a closed system like EVE to provide the same progression paths everywhere.
Don't worry about it. For whatever reasons some years ago CCP decided that developing EVE would no longer be a matter of following player behaviour pur sang, but instigating it themselves (and where not applicable inserting mechanisms based progression/choice guidance). They're not going to be as bold again as in the beginning, they don't have to. So I can't see any proper depletion/migration concept ever being introduced in such a way that you would not simply be able to sit it out as a marginal effect.
|
Terminal Insanity
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
1011
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 19:31:14 -
[467] - Quote
mkint wrote:CCP has made it crystal clear that small groups are no longer welcome in EVE. not really. citadels are a massive benefit to small groups. Small WH groups for example no longer need to risk having their stuff stolen in shared POS facilities. And the citadels cost zero fuel to provide basic docking/storage capabilities. That right there is a huge buff to small group activities.
EVE has always been an MMO so if youre complaining you cant do everything large groups can, you are correct, you are playing the wrong game. Try Elderscrolls or something singleplayer. But this game has never hurt small groups.
"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14834
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 19:42:23 -
[468] - Quote
Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:
Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec? A: Yup
Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced? A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.
Q: Is there a plan to deal with multiple refineries being spammed on a moon and a race to online the service module when the previous structure dies? A: We have a plan for dealing with this that involves a first choice and a fallback choice depending on technical limitations. Once we have a better estimate of the code limitations we'll open this up to feedback.
Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed? A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 20:25:40 -
[469] - Quote
I still kinda want to know if we can blow up the chunk "as is". There's got to be some room for things like sabotage, hit & run, interference, etc.
There really ought to be points or moments of vulnerability independant of structures and their state. If a small gang has to deal with the structure mechanisms to cause problems, that's kinda upping the ante beyond that level. Sure, said small gang could engage miners, but you know how that works - target denial is protocol. After that you get n+1.
If it isnt violent, can I at least hack something? Either via roles abuse, or externally with ship+fitting+hack mechanism? This kind of mechanism seems very complicated to me, from all the math for orbital mechanics to all the gear required to control the process - got to be some way to throw a spanner in the works |
Rutane
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 21:24:07 -
[470] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:
Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec? A: Yup .....
I wish you would also consider a randomly spawn in Low- Nullsec and even WH Space of let's call them "Micro Moon belts" that would be scanable similar like a e.g. gasclouds.
Advantages: -Very small amounts of moon material for the flavor of the game without the existance of controlled moons -think of them as super rare wandering asteroids composition according to the System Sec Status as always. -CCP can introduce that system in WH Space too without touching effectivly the moons there yet. -New and single players would experience mining moon mats as well and could harvest them, similar as the Gasmining experience ocationally, wenn scanned successfully.
Its over all good to reduce passive income, it just needs a balance for smaller entities corps-alliances that they not left behind even further with the upcoming changes compared to supercap fielding once (alliances) to defend these moon-material incomes and structures (upwell as well as HUMAN power structure) needed. POS action was mostly one man action - now you force it into multipeople. Thats why my idea was indroduce scanable microbelts too. |
|
Vampire Nocturnus
Patriotic Tendencies Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 22:16:57 -
[471] - Quote
Q: Will the distribution of minerals stay as they presently are or will you be able to pick the type of minerals based on the time it takes to tractor the rock. Such as, these moons give all gas, these ones give all R8 etc. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2790
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 22:37:45 -
[472] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote: The idea that we'd follow moon goo like this is fantasy. We'd just stay put and wait for the moongoo to come back, if your vignette was made real.
Moongoo just isn't that important to income any more.
Nah, you wouldn't if CCP ever were to do it properly. Nah. Moving sucks, and moongoo is too unimportant.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 00:54:23 -
[473] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:
Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec? A: Yup
Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced? A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.
Q: Is there a plan to deal with multiple refineries being spammed on a moon and a race to online the service module when the previous structure dies? A: We have a plan for dealing with this that involves a first choice and a fallback choice depending on technical limitations. Once we have a better estimate of the code limitations we'll open this up to feedback.
Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed? A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both.
Didn't see you answer the question about, have you replaced a relatively dull part of the game with an even duller part of the game? Yup
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2790
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 01:44:06 -
[474] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Didn't see you answer the question about, have you replaced a relatively dull part of the game with an even duller part of the game? Yup
I mean, at least now you'll be able to participate in the T2 game, rather than having your masters do it all off of your backs.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 03:06:33 -
[475] - Quote
Querns wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Didn't see you answer the question about, have you replaced a relatively dull part of the game with an even duller part of the game? Yup
I mean, at least now you'll be able to participate in the T2 game, rather than having your masters do it all off of your backs.
Clever boy you can read my current employment.
|
Elithiel en Gravonere
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 11:33:31 -
[476] - Quote
I have a question on booster production in particular. Previously, the best way to be involved in Booster production was via wormhole space. You open wormholes to the various nullsec gas constellations or regions and gas huff. It is very much within the Explorer characters' skill set to huff gas and so booster production and T3 production tends to be close on the extraction end as it requires the same skill set.
Will these refineries be used in:
1. Booster production 2. T3 production
So far, from what I've read, Refineries will NOT be available in wormhole space (despite the fact that currently, pos's are).
How are we supposed to work gas clouds and turn them into T3 materials and/or booster gas clouds and turn those into drug manufacturing in wormhole space (after pulling it back out from nullsec) if this is being denied to us to use these structures? |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2790
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 12:19:07 -
[477] - Quote
Elithiel en Gravonere wrote:I have a question on booster production in particular. Previously, the best way to be involved in Booster production was via wormhole space. You open wormholes to the various nullsec gas constellations or regions and gas huff. It is very much within the Explorer characters' skill set to huff gas and so booster production and T3 production tends to be close on the extraction end as it requires the same skill set.
Will these refineries be used in:
1. Booster production 2. T3 production
So far, from what I've read, Refineries will NOT be available in wormhole space (despite the fact that currently, pos's are).
How are we supposed to work gas clouds and turn them into T3 materials and/or booster gas clouds and turn those into drug manufacturing in wormhole space (after pulling it back out from nullsec) if this is being denied to us to use these structures?
They'll be available in WH space, and you'll be able to do reprocessing and reactions in them as normal.
The only feature that won't be available in WH space is the bit that mines moons.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
1393
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 12:24:04 -
[478] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread. Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Could they not be used as a personal moon mining array, bringing up say one asteroid instead of an entire field? When deployed by any moon mining rig when the asteroid field is deployed they simply spoof the mining ledger making it impossible to tell that anyone is actively mining, stealing or who it is. Another possibility is that it simply just hides any characters names from the ledger along with the times/dates of infractions but not the amounts harvested.
Would allow for them to still be useful in ninja operations much like a cyno inhibitor or scan inhibitor and not simply removed from game.
@OP/Thread I like the no new skills or lasers for the beginning. Any thought to new skills or crystals needs to be rethought in the first 6 months to a year after to ensure that adequate time and player data has been collected. As this will cause a massive restructuring for all T2 and allowing the most influx of miners/mining in the beginning I think is the most prudent starting off. Using deep cores is a definite idea for crystals and then allowing ordinary to mine simply at reduced rates making 3 tiers. Regular miners, T1 deep core and T2 deep core. I also agree it should be the 5 types; gas, R8, R16, R32 and R64 for crystals if implemented.
Have you heard anything I've said?
You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?
That's right.
Had to end sometime.
|
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
868
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 13:08:59 -
[479] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:
Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec? A: Yup
Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced? A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.
Q: Is there a plan to deal with multiple refineries being spammed on a moon and a race to online the service module when the previous structure dies? A: We have a plan for dealing with this that involves a first choice and a fallback choice depending on technical limitations. Once we have a better estimate of the code limitations we'll open this up to feedback.
Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed? A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both.
Can you relay to the Art Department that a 20km for the Medium and a 30km for the Large would be perfect sizes...
I'm also going to assume more info and possible models will be revealed at Fanfest? |
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
180
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 13:20:12 -
[480] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced? A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.
Strongly urge you to reconsider. The game desperately needs content. Pausing on1st reinforcement job will generate tons of content. 2nd reinforcement will not.
Go with the content generation, we desperately need it. I promise you It's worth making this module behave differently than the others in that aspect. |
|
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
1393
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 14:21:14 -
[481] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:
Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced? A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.
As an addendum to this point. How long will the asteroid field last once popped? Atm current belts are permanent, anoms and such are 4 day cycles. Will these have a despawn rate if not mined out or simply last and therefore clog up the moon until mined out? Will destruction of the refinery reset the belt as well or cause a despawn timer to commence to gain a new harvestable chunk on a delay?
As it stands from destruction to new goo cycle would be 7 days for the RF cycles, 24 hours to anchor + any despawn timer, and one week for a new moon pull.
Have you heard anything I've said?
You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?
That's right.
Had to end sometime.
|
Aeon Veritas
Easily.Offended Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 14:43:38 -
[482] - Quote
I have a few thoughts about the distribution of the moon goo per moon and the start of the fracking process. Please have for the whole proposal the planetary mode overview in mind, I think it would be great if this could be reused.
First about the distribution of moon goo per moon: The moons should be grouped like the planets are (read as ice moons, barren moons and lava moons) and those groups have, like the planets, each a set of recouces which can be found on the moon. And just like the planets each moon gets a individual layout of the richness of the recouces which can be found on it. At this point it could be possible to implement the standard, 5% and 10% ore layout depending on how rich the recource depot of the moon is. As example, I would suggest, if the recource depot bar is on the lower side (50% or less) the moon can only spawn the standard ore, if the bar is between 50% and 75% the moon spawns standard and 5% ore of the recource and a rich depot (above 75%) also spawns the 10% ore. And like at planets a hotspot can deplete and after some time respawn.
Now to the start of the fracking process: In order to use already existing mechanics in the process, it should start with a survey probe scan of the moon. The scan generates a unique token in the cargo of the scanning ship which is needed and consumed by the refinery in order to access a "view in planet mode" like overview of the moon (view in moon mode? ). In this overview the scan resuls of the survey probe can be seen, with the hotspots of the recources. Further the fracking area can be chosen there, much like setting an extractor in the planet mode. As already announced, the duration of the fracking process is variable. A longer cycle means a bigger chunk, which results in a bigger area which could then include multiply hotspots if placed correctly. And befor the fracking process is started it would be good to have a percentage distribution for the recources given, which can be found in the belt. Each fracking process starts with a scan, the scan results used to start the process can't be older than a week.
I think this would allow for some min/maxing with shorter cycle times for smaller areas which then could be only a hotspot, or longer cycle times for bigger areas to get a recource diverse belt. Also, since you don't just choose one recource to harvest like at PI, overlapping hotspots could be a thing... |
Knitram Relik
Atomic Amish
86
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 15:15:12 -
[483] - Quote
Here's my 1/50 of a dollar.
Reactions should be able to be done in Hi-Sec. This won't increase the amount of raw moon goo mined but it would give an opportunity to set up Hi-sec reaction farms. Maybe offer reaction bonuses similar to refining bonuses to Lo-Sec and Null to give an incentive to react in those areas but give the players a choice.
Also, I know this will NEVER happen, but it would be fun to set up a mining platform near a asteroid belt and just **** that belt every day. Could create some good conflict if miners get sick of their "home system" being taken over by corp structures. Never happen, but fun to think about.
"The problem with quotes on the internet is that it's really hard to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Mercenary Coalition
324
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 17:33:45 -
[484] - Quote
I'm not sure opening up the limits to 'per character' basis is the best move. The neat thing about reactions today, is the depth of planning and complexity you can chose to go to, not simply a case of smashing in N+1 alts.
Also still not sure how the flow of 'crap' materials (R8's, Gases) into the reaction chain is going to be maintained. Presuming the moon distribution is unchanged, are enough people going to want to mine these sorts of moons if there's an R64 or R32's nearby?
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
78
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 18:51:49 -
[485] - Quote
It is worth thinking about the foreseeable economic consequences of this proposal.
What do we know?
We know that the same tech II input materials are going to require significantly more player effort. So the price will rise for these inputs, as players make choices about how to spend their available time.
NOT EVERYONE HAS MORE TIME TO GIVE TO CCP. Important point, hence the caps. I think this point escapes many CCP directors, but it is a fundamental fact of the real world outside CCP.
So, given the same amount of player time spent mining, moon goo will increase in price. Thewrefore all tech II things will increase in price.
What else do we know?
We know that tech II ships and modules compete with navy and faction counterparts. we also know that the tech II line wont be getting any buffs to reflect their increased price with increased value. Therefore the choice for the consumer will be bigly moved towards the relative value of navy and faction ships.
Navy and faction ships are supplied in the same way, so their input costs stay the same. Their capabilities are not nerfed. Their value for money skyrockets, relative to the tech II ships.
And then what happens?
It is an interesting fact of the former USSR, that great planned economy, that it was never illegal to purchase imported cigars from Cuba or fine coffee from bolivia. You couldnt buy these luxuries in the shops of moscow during the soviet era, but they were never banned.
You couldn't buy them in Moscow, a vast city, because nobody was willing to pay party members the two months salary of bribes that it cost to get a small packet of coffee and ten cigars.
The cost was so great, and the value so relatively small, that the market simply collapsed. There became no market at all, for simple luxuries, in the glorious planned economy.
If CCP do not begin to understand that their customers have choice in the market, and that they cannot impose their plans upon the player base, they run a very real risk of watching as all the industrialists simple stop logging on, and go to invest their time in a more vibrant choice of entertainment.
This change effectively destroys the value, the value for money, of a popular line of ships and modules. It offers nothing to replace what has been made less attractive.
CCP staff look at the numbers and talk about price, as if price and value are the same thing.
The price of coffee and cigars was huge in Moscow in 1988. The market value was about zero.
You will not grow the eve economy by forcing people with choice to adhere to your simplistic little plans. People will simply leave. |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 20:53:02 -
[486] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:........................... People will simply leave.
Only when there is a viable, genuinely competing, alternative.
EVE is the only deeply absorbing MMORPG that I have ever found that was worth playing seriously.
I have played it when I had limited time to play and I play it now when I have a lot more time to play.
EVE has a place for casual game-play and it has a place for someone who plays it for 'real' - but more casual play, just like Alpha-play, comes with restrictions because of the ability of the near-simulation to cater for both ends of the spectrum.
And therefore it probably does have to be accepted that, if EVE/CCP are to remain true to their design, then the loner, the casual and the small will indeed have to accept limitations on what they can do.
I hope EVE remains for many years - but it will continue to tread a reasonably fine line between being what it is, a niche game that is like no other, but does remain commercially viable; and a game that appeals more to the mass market, but will then still die when it gets old and the bored and impatient move on.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 22:14:15 -
[487] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:It is worth thinking about the foreseeable economic consequences of this proposal.
What do we know?
We know that the same tech II input materials are going to require significantly more player effort. So the price will rise for these inputs, as players make choices about how to spend their available time.
NOT EVERYONE HAS MORE TIME TO GIVE TO CCP. Important point, hence the caps. I think this point escapes many CCP directors, but it is a fundamental fact of the real world outside CCP.
So, given the same amount of player time spent mining, moon goo will increase in price. Thewrefore all tech II things will increase in price.
What else do we know?
We know that tech II ships and modules compete with navy and faction counterparts. we also know that the tech II line wont be getting any buffs to reflect their increased price with increased value. Therefore the choice for the consumer will be bigly moved towards the relative value of navy and faction ships.
Navy and faction ships are supplied in the same way, so their input costs stay the same. Their capabilities are not nerfed. Their value for money skyrockets, relative to the tech II ships.
And then what happens?
It is an interesting fact of the former USSR, that great planned economy, that it was never illegal to purchase imported cigars from Cuba or fine coffee from bolivia. You couldnt buy these luxuries in the shops of moscow during the soviet era, but they were never banned.
You couldn't buy them in Moscow, a vast city, because nobody was willing to pay party members the two months salary of bribes that it cost to get a small packet of coffee and ten cigars.
The cost was so great, and the value so relatively small, that the market simply collapsed. There became no market at all, for simple luxuries, in the glorious planned economy.
If CCP do not begin to understand that their customers have choice in the market, and that they cannot impose their plans upon the player base, they run a very real risk of watching as all the industrialists simple stop logging on, and go to invest their time in a more vibrant choice of entertainment.
This change effectively destroys the value, the value for money, of a popular line of ships and modules. It offers nothing to replace what has been made less attractive.
CCP staff look at the numbers and talk about price, as if price and value are the same thing.
The price of coffee and cigars was huge in Moscow in 1988. The market value was about zero.
You will not grow the eve economy by forcing people with choice to adhere to your simplistic little plans. People will simply leave.
Pretty much says it.
|
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
292
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 22:32:44 -
[488] - Quote
I think this will be interesting
Moving the old Tech II mining into active game play vs passive income should encourage more targets out on the field for PVP players.
I would like to see some work on the interaction of the mining process, allowing some interaction to increase yield vs just afk mining.
Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2017.03.26 22:50:33 -
[489] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:I think this will be interesting
Moving the old Tech II mining into active game play vs passive income should encourage more targets out on the field for PVP players.
I would like to see some work on the interaction of the mining process, allowing some interaction to increase yield vs just afk mining.
And who exactly is going to have time to hunt when everyone will be mining? |
Citika
Presumed Ignorant
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 00:18:34 -
[490] - Quote
I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
Balance issues aside for now, what this effectively means is that a much higher emphasis is placed on mining asteroid fields than before. In order to maximize profits, the field needs to be cleared ASAP in order to start hauling up another chunk, but between those mining efforts are either a long period of nothing for small organizations while the chunk rises, or constant mining for larger empires with multiple refineries pulling up multiple chunks.
The only people this really benefits are the massive nullsec empires who can organize massive fleets and multiboxers operating near their refinery. It does not always benefit smaller organizations, who might have their efforts stolen by organized mining incursions which can tank the refinery defenses (which I'm assuming are going to be similar to the Raitaru and Azbel). It does not benefit Wormholers, who now have to leave their holes for reactions. And it certainly does not help the economy (read Ratte's post above, he explained it better than I ever could).
One solution might be to allow moon mining EVERYWHERE. Sure, give High crummy ores or super low yields or taxes or empire restrictions or only owned by NPCs, but give them something. That way a small amount of materials are always available for the T2 items that everyone needs (Guns, Ammo, Drones), and then allow the high-quality materials to be mined in null.
Another solution might be to allow the refineries to collect some of the materials themselves. A person controlling the refinery may be able to collect a small amount of resources via a gigantic refinery-based mining laser or with fighter-sized drones. This weakens the defenses of the refinery as well, so a balance between offense and mining may need to be considered.
These are just ideas, and they are obviously not the best solutions. Those solutions take time and effort and planning, something I did not do for this post. |
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2790
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 01:03:21 -
[491] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Gevlin wrote:I think this will be interesting
Moving the old Tech II mining into active game play vs passive income should encourage more targets out on the field for PVP players.
I would like to see some work on the interaction of the mining process, allowing some interaction to increase yield vs just afk mining.
And who exactly is going to have time to hunt when everyone will be mining? Ah, the wonderful sounds of yet another sap who thinks their alliance will FORCE them to mine. I love it. So many people have this intransigent belief moongoo = SRP and it's such a rigid association that they literally cannot conceive of another way to provide SRP.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2790
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 01:04:19 -
[492] - Quote
Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
So don't mine if you don't want to mine, or don't have time to mine. You can safely pass this feature up; it'll be okay.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Queen of Jita
Deal With It Bruv
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 02:56:35 -
[493] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:It is worth thinking about the foreseeable economic consequences of this proposal.
[...]
You will not grow the eve economy by forcing people with choice to adhere to your simplistic little plans. People will simply leave.
I think that you are totally wrong. You just wrote the another post "eve will die". I dont think so. Even if a few players will leave, the another ones will take their niche. It happened thousand times.
In addition all your speculation is built on your imagination how the new system will work. We haven't seen any numbers. We dont know how effective will be the new ore aquiring system. Actually we know the only raw idea and the direction where game will eveolve. So take it easy and don't panic
Personally I love the new idea of moon mining. I think that would be great, if the moon ore belts were rich and impossible for mining with rorqual drones. It would generate a lot of content and create great opportunities for all - big and small corps/alliances. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2850
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 11:35:47 -
[494] - Quote
Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
Balance issues aside for now, what this effectively means is that a much higher emphasis is placed on mining asteroid fields than before. In order to maximize profits, the field needs to be cleared ASAP in order to start hauling up another chunk, but between those mining efforts are either a long period of nothing for small organizations while the chunk rises, or constant mining for larger empires with multiple refineries pulling up multiple chunks.
The only people this really benefits are the massive nullsec empires who can organize massive fleets and multiboxers operating near their refinery. It does not always benefit smaller organizations, who might have their efforts stolen by organized mining incursions which can tank the refinery defenses (which I'm assuming are going to be similar to the Raitaru and Azbel). It does not benefit Wormholers, who now have to leave their holes for reactions. And it certainly does not help the economy (read Ratte's post above, he explained it better than I ever could).
Bolded and underlined the important part. The part that explains why Querns is so keen on these changes. Delve, the Drones Regions, other deep 0.0 will be fine. NPC Null, Low Sec, and accessible parts of 0.0 will suffer from these changes.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
723
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 11:50:19 -
[495] - Quote
Querns wrote:Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
So don't mine if you don't want to mine, or don't have time to mine. You can safely pass this feature up; it'll be okay.
So you don't think that null alliances/corps won't make mining ops compulsory under threat of punitive punishments?
Just as some have mandatory pvp fleets, pve fleets will become mandatory as well to gather the belts.
Mine or don't mine won't be an option unless you want to be (possibly) kicked.
Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..."
" They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."
Welcome to EVE.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2791
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:05:58 -
[496] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:Querns wrote:Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
So don't mine if you don't want to mine, or don't have time to mine. You can safely pass this feature up; it'll be okay. So you don't think that null alliances/corps won't make mining ops compulsory under threat of punitive punishments? Just as some have mandatory pvp fleets, pve fleets will become mandatory as well to gather the belts. Mine or don't mine won't be an option unless you want to be (possibly) kicked.
Some might, yes. However, democracy is ever-present in eve; you vote with your feet. Don't stand for an alliance that would press-gang you to mine.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2791
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:08:44 -
[497] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
Balance issues aside for now, what this effectively means is that a much higher emphasis is placed on mining asteroid fields than before. In order to maximize profits, the field needs to be cleared ASAP in order to start hauling up another chunk, but between those mining efforts are either a long period of nothing for small organizations while the chunk rises, or constant mining for larger empires with multiple refineries pulling up multiple chunks.
The only people this really benefits are the massive nullsec empires who can organize massive fleets and multiboxers operating near their refinery. It does not always benefit smaller organizations, who might have their efforts stolen by organized mining incursions which can tank the refinery defenses (which I'm assuming are going to be similar to the Raitaru and Azbel). It does not benefit Wormholers, who now have to leave their holes for reactions. And it certainly does not help the economy (read Ratte's post above, he explained it better than I ever could).
Bolded and underlined the important part. The part that explains why Querns is so keen on these changes. Delve, the Drones Regions, other deep 0.0 will be fine. NPC Null, Low Sec, and accessible parts of 0.0 will suffer from these changes.
You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes?
I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:19:55 -
[498] - Quote
Querns wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Gevlin wrote:I think this will be interesting
Moving the old Tech II mining into active game play vs passive income should encourage more targets out on the field for PVP players.
I would like to see some work on the interaction of the mining process, allowing some interaction to increase yield vs just afk mining.
And who exactly is going to have time to hunt when everyone will be mining? Ah, the wonderful sounds of yet another sap who thinks their alliance will FORCE them to mine. I love it. So many people have this intransigent belief moongoo = SRP and it's such a rigid association that they literally cannot conceive of another way to provide SRP.
Don't be so ignorant.
This isn't anything to do with SRP you stupid goon. |
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:21:23 -
[499] - Quote
Querns wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
Balance issues aside for now, what this effectively means is that a much higher emphasis is placed on mining asteroid fields than before. In order to maximize profits, the field needs to be cleared ASAP in order to start hauling up another chunk, but between those mining efforts are either a long period of nothing for small organizations while the chunk rises, or constant mining for larger empires with multiple refineries pulling up multiple chunks.
The only people this really benefits are the massive nullsec empires who can organize massive fleets and multiboxers operating near their refinery. It does not always benefit smaller organizations, who might have their efforts stolen by organized mining incursions which can tank the refinery defenses (which I'm assuming are going to be similar to the Raitaru and Azbel). It does not benefit Wormholers, who now have to leave their holes for reactions. And it certainly does not help the economy (read Ratte's post above, he explained it better than I ever could).
Bolded and underlined the important part. The part that explains why Querns is so keen on these changes. Delve, the Drones Regions, other deep 0.0 will be fine. NPC Null, Low Sec, and accessible parts of 0.0 will suffer from these changes. You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes? I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income.
Pure ignorance again from your stupid goon... it remove top down income... NOPE still gonna generate top-level income from it; how you can't see this is beyond me. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2791
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:26:06 -
[500] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Querns wrote: You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes?
I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income.
Pure ignorance again from your stupid goon... it remove top down income... NOPE still gonna generate top-level income from it; how you can't see this is beyond me.
I see that you don't understand the difference between top-down and bottom-up income. Why even join this conversation if you lack even a rudimentary command of finance?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2791
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:27:15 -
[501] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Querns wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Gevlin wrote:I think this will be interesting
Moving the old Tech II mining into active game play vs passive income should encourage more targets out on the field for PVP players.
I would like to see some work on the interaction of the mining process, allowing some interaction to increase yield vs just afk mining.
And who exactly is going to have time to hunt when everyone will be mining? Ah, the wonderful sounds of yet another sap who thinks their alliance will FORCE them to mine. I love it. So many people have this intransigent belief moongoo = SRP and it's such a rigid association that they literally cannot conceive of another way to provide SRP. Don't be so ignorant. This isn't anything to do with SRP you stupid goon.
I apologize, I forgot that being press-ganged into mining to fill the pockets of the embezzlers at the top of your organization would also be a thing. A grave omission on my part.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
erg cz
Broz With Froz Dot Dot Dot
574
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 12:59:49 -
[502] - Quote
Suggestion: explosion of the chunk shoul create asteroids with very different size. From 1 unit (literaly) to few tens of thousands of moon goo unit. Small pieces should merge together over time (after 1 week there will be only one massive asteroid cloud, easy mineable even by a barge, equiped with the dust harvester ) unless new explosion in the same area will not dispatch particles again.
Benefits: That will allow ninja mining the moon goo by entities, who does not posess refinery. Otherwise owner just quickly rorqual the fresh belt and warp out.
Details: Create new AOE module for vacuum clean the small asteroids staight away and give the Primae ability to use it. Turning it on will be like lighting the cyno (everyone will see you and you can not move) but you will wipe even the smallest asteroid in reasonable time. Create covert op T2 version of Venture, that is able to see remnants of the asteroid dust on D-scan. With two lasers it should be able to mine small moon goo asteroids if the user will like to or it can fit some sort of asteroid dust cloud harvester.
Absolutely free trial extension. Just click the link and get extra 250 000 SP for free!
|
Ocean Ormand
Bagel and Lox
56
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 13:45:51 -
[503] - Quote
Iit seems to me that currently we likely have close to a 100% production from the valuable/useful moons. With the new system, it seems likely that the moons in lowsec will be abandoned/unmineable. Mining in lowsec is almost nonexistent now - it hardly seems likely that there are enough miners in the game that will be willing to relocate to lowsec to suddenly start mining in what has traditionally been a hostile environment to mining. If the lowsec moons are not farmed that may significantly reduce the available moon goo. In fact, are there even enough miners to do this at all? There are literally hundreds of different moons out there - can we really expect that folk are going to be rigorously attending all of these timed operations? How much mining will have to be done to obtain the same level of production that we currently have? If we cant achieve something close to the same level we will have shortages of t2 materials. Moreover this is a forced grind being added into the game - show up at this time every week and shoot x-number of rocks is as grindy as it gets. This seems to me something that only benefits the large alliances since they are the only ones that can sustain this sort of grinding in the long term. |
Tribal Trogdor
Better Off Red Unspoken Alliance.
40
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 14:09:19 -
[504] - Quote
How is the transition going to be made from towers to refineries?
Obviously you can just release them and all the towers stop working. I would imagine there would have to be a period where they both work while the refineries are produced in the proper quantity or RIP economy.
If there's a tower on a moon currently, do those owners keep the right to mine the moon until either the tower dies or they put up a refinery?
What of POS replacement? I know they'll still hold relevance for sov stuff like jump bridges and such, but once they're off the table for moon mining and reactions, their value is going to go down the toilet. Is the plan to do NPC buy orders for them in the future, and if so, would they be based on the value at the time? Or maybe the plan is to turn them into their input material items? The latter would probably be a better way to go
. Main issue here is some people have tons of money tied up in reactions farms. They're going to want to liquidate what they have in towers, to buy refineries. And they're all going to want to do it at once because they have to keep things running/hold the moons until the day the new structures come out. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2792
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 14:09:33 -
[505] - Quote
Ocean Ormand wrote:Iit seems to me that currently we likely have close to a 100% production from the valuable/useful moons. With the new system, it seems likely that the moons in lowsec will be abandoned/unmineable. Mining in lowsec is almost nonexistent now - it hardly seems likely that there are enough miners in the game that will be willing to relocate to lowsec to suddenly start mining in what has traditionally been a hostile environment to mining. If the lowsec moons are not farmed that may significantly reduce the available moon goo. In fact, are there even enough miners to do this at all? There are literally hundreds of different moons out there - can we really expect that folk are going to be rigorously attending all of these timed operations? How much mining will have to be done to obtain the same level of production that we currently have? If we cant achieve something close to the same level we will have shortages of t2 materials. Moreover this is a forced grind being added into the game - show up at this time every week and shoot x-number of rocks is as grindy as it gets. This seems to me something that only benefits the large alliances since they are the only ones that can sustain this sort of grinding in the long term.
You're putting the cart before the horse here. Lowsec mining doesn't really occur today because there's nothing valuable to mine. Lowsec has no ihub-spawned mining anomalies, and the asteroids in their belts are pretty garbage. Asteroids in lowsec also deplete rapidly, like highsec, so there's a lot of moving involved.
With a static, replenishing belt provided by a refinery, there's less moving, more consistency, and more value. Unless there's some as-yet-unannounced interaction between refineries and security status (a thing I seriously doubt will happen,) a lowsec moongoo belt will be the peer of its nullsec brethren. There will be exactly as much impetus to mine a lowsec belt as there will a nullsec belt. Perhaps more, since bubbles and bombs can't interrupt the mining.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2792
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 14:16:56 -
[506] - Quote
Tribal Trogdor wrote:How is the transition going to be made from towers to refineries?
Obviously you can just release them and all the towers stop working. I would imagine there would have to be a period where they both work while the refineries are produced in the proper quantity or RIP economy.
If there's a tower on a moon currently, do those owners keep the right to mine the moon until either the tower dies or they put up a refinery?
What of POS replacement? I know they'll still hold relevance for sov stuff like jump bridges and such, but once they're off the table for moon mining and reactions, their value is going to go down the toilet. Is the plan to do NPC buy orders for them in the future, and if so, would they be based on the value at the time? Or maybe the plan is to turn them into their input material items? The latter would probably be a better way to go
. Main issue here is some people have tons of money tied up in reactions farms. They're going to want to liquidate what they have in towers, to buy refineries. And they're all going to want to do it at once because they have to keep things running/hold the moons until the day the new structures come out.
Hopefully, all the moon miners and reactors will just simply stop working on the release date.
There are significant stockpiles of moon minerals held by basically everyone with a brain. Those need to be drained. Having a hard cutoff will help that quite a bit.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 14:20:11 -
[507] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tribal Trogdor wrote:How is the transition going to be made from towers to refineries?
Obviously you can just release them and all the towers stop working. I would imagine there would have to be a period where they both work while the refineries are produced in the proper quantity or RIP economy.
If there's a tower on a moon currently, do those owners keep the right to mine the moon until either the tower dies or they put up a refinery?
What of POS replacement? I know they'll still hold relevance for sov stuff like jump bridges and such, but once they're off the table for moon mining and reactions, their value is going to go down the toilet. Is the plan to do NPC buy orders for them in the future, and if so, would they be based on the value at the time? Or maybe the plan is to turn them into their input material items? The latter would probably be a better way to go
. Main issue here is some people have tons of money tied up in reactions farms. They're going to want to liquidate what they have in towers, to buy refineries. And they're all going to want to do it at once because they have to keep things running/hold the moons until the day the new structures come out. Hopefully, all the moon miners and reactors will just simply stop working on the release date. There are significant stockpiles of moon minerals held by basically everyone with a brain. Those need to be drained. Having a hard cutoff will help that quite a bit. itll take time to build the new structures tho. A cut off on the release date may not be good because of that. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2792
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 14:44:17 -
[508] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Querns wrote: There are significant stockpiles of moon minerals held by basically everyone with a brain. Those need to be drained. Having a hard cutoff will help that quite a bit.
itll take time to build the new structures tho. A cut off on the release date may not be good because of that.
No, that'll help accelerate the draining of stockpiles quite a bit.
You can pre-build comps and just install the refineries on day 1. The impact to reactors will be minimal. Stockpiles carry the week+ delay on raws through to maximum saturation.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 15:10:00 -
[509] - Quote
Querns wrote:
You're putting the cart before the horse here. Lowsec mining doesn't really occur today because there's nothing valuable to mine. Lowsec has no ihub-spawned mining anomalies, and the asteroids in their belts are pretty garbage. Asteroids in lowsec also deplete rapidly, like highsec, so there's a lot of moving involved.
With a static, replenishing belt provided by a refinery, there's less moving, more consistency, and more value. Unless there's some as-yet-unannounced interaction between refineries and security status (a thing I seriously doubt will happen,) a lowsec moongoo belt will be the peer of its nullsec brethren. There will be exactly as much impetus to mine a lowsec belt as there will a nullsec belt. Perhaps more, since bubbles and bombs can't interrupt the mining.
That's just one part of the picture. Keep in mind that not only are there easier ways to get resources, playstyles also differ quite a bit, and in lowsec there is no sense of control (fun to explore the existing playstyles / niches there, it all revolves around that) where it comes to mining.
Not that anybody from outside of lowsec would be that interested in going there, except if the playstyles match, for the available tiers of rewards in resource harvesting like mining. But this is a state which is derivative, it's not a root cause, if you will.
It's a fun exploration of behaviour following mechanisms, as opposed to the other way around. One is able to reinvigorate lowsec without applying stimuli to low sec demographics to become the same as null, the other is not (instead it effectively promotes that pitfall).
We often think that reward drives choice. It does, but we tend to not fully realise how broad "reward" is. It isn't just ISK, on the contrary. More often than not this comes long after more primary reward connectors like affirmation, identity, playstyle, mentality and so forth. Because we think, we project. And thus we assume. And those who don't, still project - just their own perception on to others
With the concept as it is currently, CCP is firmly in the corner of "we provide the mechanisms for selected targets with healthy consequences for our indexes". It's entirely understandable, but it is a pity. Then again, this is nothing new.
Lowsec has not had much of core attention throughout the years, very often considered a transit zone, at times a dumping ground, irregularly a niche environment. Which is a bit ironic, because in contrast to null it's actually quite diverse. Sometimes lowsec is an extension of highsec, other times of null. Quite often it's a composite dynamic with different playstyles interacting. Which is very different from highsec as well as null - looking at it without recognising these things has been the underlying reason why it's not gotten that much attention, but it is also why it's been largely sheltered. Or protected, if you will. Not any longer.
The one thing which worries me on the current state of this concept isn't how easy it is to counter, to use, to direct or even to abuse. It's that in the long run it enforces a slow but steady adopting of an organisational mold which already exists in a dominant manner elsewhere. Nullsec particularly, but increasingly also highsec (including the recent pattern of null/high entanglements which there too reinforces such developments).
I do think that this is a shame, but also a bit of a stumbling block in the long run. EVE is diverse in many ways, and it should be. If all organic player based organisation stimuli point to the same outcome this doesn't reinforce health of the dynamic, it does the opposite. Granted, it makes it easier to calculate, to model, to capture in indexes of statistics. But it also reintroduces the old trap of having to replace one set of mechanisms which exactly the same (only minor variations, look & feel) when the indexes show saturation or staleness. Funny thing, by that time it's too late, due to groupthink's influence on collective perception, but also due to social intertia and economic effects.
Now I can accept that CCP cannot - so to speak - allocate the resources in order to take the opposite approach (mechanisms following behaviour). But in order to avoid the known pitfalls (EVE has history in many things, aside of stupid amounts of research on all of this being available to CCP) they're going to have to provide more behavioural options. Right now, the current concept is way too static, too predictable, too easy to capture in min/max and n+1, and nothing really offsets the long term negative effects.
So we can all keep debating the detail level of the current "as is" concept until we see blue in the face, or we can accept that the static nature of things will always be subject to ruthless min/max/n+1/narrative drama. And instead see if there's things CCP can add to the model in order to provide room for composite and diverse behaviour. Lowsec folks are going to have to be a tad more expressive though for that to begin, and null should not be so blatant with its directives & narratives. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2792
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 15:26:29 -
[510] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote:
You're putting the cart before the horse here. Lowsec mining doesn't really occur today because there's nothing valuable to mine. Lowsec has no ihub-spawned mining anomalies, and the asteroids in their belts are pretty garbage. Asteroids in lowsec also deplete rapidly, like highsec, so there's a lot of moving involved.
With a static, replenishing belt provided by a refinery, there's less moving, more consistency, and more value. Unless there's some as-yet-unannounced interaction between refineries and security status (a thing I seriously doubt will happen,) a lowsec moongoo belt will be the peer of its nullsec brethren. There will be exactly as much impetus to mine a lowsec belt as there will a nullsec belt. Perhaps more, since bubbles and bombs can't interrupt the mining.
That's just one part of the picture. Keep in mind that not only are there easier ways to get resources, playstyles also differ quite a bit, and in lowsec there is no sense of control (fun to explore the existing playstyles / niches there, it all revolves around that) where it comes to mining.
There's no requirement for CCP to maintain the playstyles of folks living in any given area of space. If there was, nullsec wouldn't have changed nearly as much as it has.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Citika
Presumed Ignorant
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 15:45:42 -
[511] - Quote
The new moon mining mechanic will be huge. The biggest impact this will have is removing AFK, top-level income from alliances and coalitions and replacing it with active, character-based income. This can only be a good thing overall, but the implementation needs to be small enough that an entire fleet doesn't need to be formed to wipe a moon belt, but also big enough that one person (or a small gang) can't wipe the belt within a few hours.
This is going to remove a major source of concentrated income from alliances and dilute it across the alliance members who mine. That alone will change the entire economy. The issue I have is whether this content will be available for anywhere else. Wormholes in particular will suffer from this, while Empire space will just see a change in their economies without being able to do much about it. |
Ocean Ormand
Bagel and Lox
56
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 16:22:10 -
[512] - Quote
Querns wrote:Ocean Ormand wrote:Iit seems to me that currently we likely have close to a 100% production from the valuable/useful moons. With the new system, it seems likely that the moons in lowsec will be abandoned/unmineable. Mining in lowsec is almost nonexistent now - it hardly seems likely that there are enough miners in the game that will be willing to relocate to lowsec to suddenly start mining in what has traditionally been a hostile environment to mining. If the lowsec moons are not farmed that may significantly reduce the available moon goo. In fact, are there even enough miners to do this at all? There are literally hundreds of different moons out there - can we really expect that folk are going to be rigorously attending all of these timed operations? How much mining will have to be done to obtain the same level of production that we currently have? If we cant achieve something close to the same level we will have shortages of t2 materials. Moreover this is a forced grind being added into the game - show up at this time every week and shoot x-number of rocks is as grindy as it gets. This seems to me something that only benefits the large alliances since they are the only ones that can sustain this sort of grinding in the long term. You're putting the cart before the horse here. Lowsec mining doesn't really occur today because there's nothing valuable to mine. Lowsec has no ihub-spawned mining anomalies, and the asteroids in their belts are pretty garbage. Asteroids in lowsec also deplete rapidly, like highsec, so there's a lot of moving involved. With a static, replenishing belt provided by a refinery, there's less moving, more consistency, and more value. Unless there's some as-yet-unannounced interaction between refineries and security status (a thing I seriously doubt will happen,) a lowsec moongoo belt will be the peer of its nullsec brethren. There will be exactly as much impetus to mine a lowsec belt as there will a nullsec belt. Perhaps more, since bubbles and bombs can't interrupt the mining.
I just want to know - how many mining hours per character will be needed to maintain current levels of moon goo on the market and where ccp expects to get all of these miners to mine this goo. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3176
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 16:52:01 -
[513] - Quote
Hopefully CCP will put some consideration into making the process of collecting or dissmeinating taxes/bills a little easier. The mining tracker is nice, but using it might become extremely tedious. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2851
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 16:59:14 -
[514] - Quote
Querns wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Citika wrote:I see a few issues with this plan:
More miners will be needed in Null just to mine these Moon belts. These moon belts are covered by refinery weapons, which makes them somewhat safer than normal belts, making them more attractive for fleet operations. At the same time though, Null will need more effort turned towards mining moon goo instead of fighting, roaming, or other actions which are the reason people play. Most people have lives outside the game, and popping on to Eve for two hours just to scoop up a belt does not sound like a lot of fun.
Balance issues aside for now, what this effectively means is that a much higher emphasis is placed on mining asteroid fields than before. In order to maximize profits, the field needs to be cleared ASAP in order to start hauling up another chunk, but between those mining efforts are either a long period of nothing for small organizations while the chunk rises, or constant mining for larger empires with multiple refineries pulling up multiple chunks.
The only people this really benefits are the massive nullsec empires who can organize massive fleets and multiboxers operating near their refinery. It does not always benefit smaller organizations, who might have their efforts stolen by organized mining incursions which can tank the refinery defenses (which I'm assuming are going to be similar to the Raitaru and Azbel). It does not benefit Wormholers, who now have to leave their holes for reactions. And it certainly does not help the economy (read Ratte's post above, he explained it better than I ever could).
Bolded and underlined the important part. The part that explains why Querns is so keen on these changes. Delve, the Drones Regions, other deep 0.0 will be fine. NPC Null, Low Sec, and accessible parts of 0.0 will suffer from these changes. You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes? I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income.
I don't comment on whether something is a good idea based purely on self-interest. Yes, I know I could access Delve, that does not mean this is a net gain for Eve as a whole. "Join the largest group in the game" is not a good answer for anything.
Farms and fields means the side with the least accessible fields and the most peasants always wins. With Jump Freighters as they are, there is no real cost to being inaccessible. That should change, but that will also hurt smaller groups even more.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2792
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 17:13:46 -
[515] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Querns wrote:You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes?
I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income. I don't comment on whether something is a good idea based purely on self-interest. Yes, I know I could access Delve, that does not mean this is a net gain for Eve as a whole. "Join the largest group in the game" is not a good answer for anything. Farms and fields means the side with the least accessible fields and the most peasants always wins. This is preferable to having people run Incursion alts or something like that, but I don't like seeing NPC 0.0 and low sec get hurt so much. With Jump Freighters as they are, there is no real cost to being inaccessible. That should change, but that will also hurt smaller groups even more. There must be a better balancing point.
"Inaccessible?" Delve has NPC 0.0 stations, and bubbles were severely nerfed. Our space is the most accessible in the game.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SnakeTheBest
Brothership Of EVE The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 17:14:32 -
[516] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
Here's the first set of Q&A after the early feedback and discussion:
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today.
Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature. However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
what will happen to the solo moon operations?? there will be space for that too on the new mechanics? i know ppl that run maybe a couple of moons to do reactions for personal earnings, their buisness will be death then? |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2792
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 17:20:31 -
[517] - Quote
SnakeTheBest wrote: what will happen to the solo moon operations?? there will be space for that too on the new mechanics? i know ppl that run maybe a couple of moons to do reactions for personal earnings, their buisness will be death then?
You'll still be able to do reactions alone. Moon mining can be, too, but not as effectively, since you'll have to undock to mine stuff.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
17
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 18:14:22 -
[518] - Quote
Querns wrote:SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote:
You're putting the cart before the horse here. Lowsec mining doesn't really occur today because there's nothing valuable to mine. Lowsec has no ihub-spawned mining anomalies, and the asteroids in their belts are pretty garbage. Asteroids in lowsec also deplete rapidly, like highsec, so there's a lot of moving involved.
With a static, replenishing belt provided by a refinery, there's less moving, more consistency, and more value. Unless there's some as-yet-unannounced interaction between refineries and security status (a thing I seriously doubt will happen,) a lowsec moongoo belt will be the peer of its nullsec brethren. There will be exactly as much impetus to mine a lowsec belt as there will a nullsec belt. Perhaps more, since bubbles and bombs can't interrupt the mining.
That's just one part of the picture. Keep in mind that not only are there easier ways to get resources, playstyles also differ quite a bit, and in lowsec there is no sense of control (fun to explore the existing playstyles / niches there, it all revolves around that) where it comes to mining. There's no requirement for CCP to maintain the playstyles of folks living in any given area of space. If there was, nullsec wouldn't have changed nearly as much as it has.
Indeed, but it is a requirement to have a diverse behavioural environment where a multitude of playstyles exist. Whether a given playstyle is feasible, now that is an entirely different debate. As such, CCP has an interest in continuing to provide room for diversity. In truth, changing matters in such a manner that as all work and all play becomes the same everywhere it makes EVE a dull boy (bad Twin Peaks reference moment yes).
And that, is a problem. Granted, in the long run. But resource allocation for swapping things out is also - always - a long term venture.
Anyhow, the case in point was that ISK isn't the sole reward. It is in fact more means than goal in a very primal way. We shouldn't delude ourselves by staring at that detail level. Impetus as such is also just a means to an end, interexchangetable with any other. Making that, a complete non-argument in game design.
|
Sassums
Repo Industries
139
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 18:27:36 -
[519] - Quote
Still no answer or clarification as to why ice products are being added to the list of resources for T3 production.....making WH space even less appealing.... |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2796
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 18:48:43 -
[520] - Quote
Sassums wrote:Still no answer or clarification as to why ice products are being added to the list of resources for T3 production.....making WH space even less appealing....
You've found a way to run reactions in wormhole space without fuel, an item that takes ice to make? Wow! What's your secret?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2853
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 19:02:21 -
[521] - Quote
Querns wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Querns wrote:You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes?
I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income. I don't comment on whether something is a good idea based purely on self-interest. Yes, I know I could access Delve, that does not mean this is a net gain for Eve as a whole. "Join the largest group in the game" is not a good answer for anything. Farms and fields means the side with the least accessible fields and the most peasants always wins. This is preferable to having people run Incursion alts or something like that, but I don't like seeing NPC 0.0 and low sec get hurt so much. With Jump Freighters as they are, there is no real cost to being inaccessible. That should change, but that will also hurt smaller groups even more. There must be a better balancing point. "Inaccessible?" Delve has NPC 0.0 stations, and bubbles were severely nerfed. Our space is the most accessible in the game.
I have lived in Delve several times. Yes, it has NPC stations. That is a good thing. I wish all 0.0 space had NPC stations nearby.
It's not as bad as the Drones Regions, that's true. It is still a pain in the ass to jump into it. You are still relatively inaccessible compared with Tribute.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2803
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 20:00:35 -
[522] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Querns wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Querns wrote:You do know that you have access to Delve's Elysian hunting grounds, yes?
I'm keen on these changes because they remove a huge source of top-down income. I am a staunch believer that nullsec should be about farms and fields, generating bottom-up income. I don't comment on whether something is a good idea based purely on self-interest. Yes, I know I could access Delve, that does not mean this is a net gain for Eve as a whole. "Join the largest group in the game" is not a good answer for anything. Farms and fields means the side with the least accessible fields and the most peasants always wins. This is preferable to having people run Incursion alts or something like that, but I don't like seeing NPC 0.0 and low sec get hurt so much. With Jump Freighters as they are, there is no real cost to being inaccessible. That should change, but that will also hurt smaller groups even more. There must be a better balancing point. "Inaccessible?" Delve has NPC 0.0 stations, and bubbles were severely nerfed. Our space is the most accessible in the game. I have lived in Delve several times. Yes, it has NPC stations. That is a good thing. I wish all 0.0 space had NPC stations nearby. It's not as bad as the Drones Regions, that's true. It is still a pain in the ass to jump into it. You are still relatively inaccessible compared with Tribute.
If your only metric for accessibility is "distance from Jita" then sure.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Aisa Anistan
GAZNOROCK Inc. GANOR INC.
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 21:28:04 -
[523] - Quote
I want to adress the "where we get the miners?"-issue brought up especially by some of the low-sec-guys...
To be honest, the problem isn't the supposed lack of miners but the mentality of larger low-sec-groups as a whole.
For example: My corp lives near some low-sec-systems in kor-azor and khanid region. These low-sec systems are basically dead, apart from logistic cyno-alts, some moon mining POS's and one, maybe two big(ger) alliances who essentially control all the systems within their respective jump ranges. When they find a target, they hot drop or BLOB it. And for the recieving end this is not funny the first time, and it won't get more fun if done repeatedly and on a daily basis. When you can't figth back in terms of fire-/manpower, you only got 2 options: avoid them and deny content or leave for good. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining, if in the same position I would probably do the same. But in doing so, they killed and kill any incentive to go to this area regardless how good the risk/reward ratio might be.
But with these changes even low sec corps will need to rethink this mentality and allowing neutral corps to exploit these new ressources for a " reasonable" price (if they don't want to blueball or invite everyone in their sphere of influence, that is), which could mean more people in low sec and thus more targets to shot for pvpers in general.
My point is: if you're a pvp-focused alliance/corp, you don't have to resort to mining to profit. Let others more willingly do the dirty work for you for a piece of the cake, and blow their stuff if they don't comply. More fun for everybody Make eve mmo again... |
Circumstantial Evidence
391
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 22:42:44 -
[524] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tribal Trogdor wrote:How is the transition going to be made from towers to refineries?
Obviously you can just release them and all the towers stop working. I would imagine there would have to be a period where they both work while the refineries are produced in the proper quantity or RIP economy.
If there's a tower on a moon currently, do those owners keep the right to mine the moon until either the tower dies or they put up a refinery? [...] Hopefully, all the moon miners and reactors will just simply stop working on the release date. [...] If CCP follows the pattern related to refining quoted below, nobody would lose old mechanics during a transition period, but the new method will yield better results. Carrots rather than sticks, to encourage migration to new mechanics.Quote:Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed? A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both. |
Baldin Tarmain
B T C
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.27 23:38:39 -
[525] - Quote
Querns wrote:SnakeTheBest wrote: what will happen to the solo moon operations?? there will be space for that too on the new mechanics? i know ppl that run maybe a couple of moons to do reactions for personal earnings, their buisness will be death then?
You'll still be able to do reactions alone. Moon mining can be, too, but not as effectively, since you'll have to undock to mine stuff.
I run 8 moons in Lo-Sec. Half my reaction materials come from mined moongoo. All the composites go into the market. Will I run 1..or 2 with the new mechanic? Maybe. How many independents like me are out there? If you have a stat that limits the impact to the economy I would like to see it. Not saying it's not there, just don't know. I run over 2 billion isk a week in composites. Are there a hundred like me? A thousand? How many will stop completely or severely curtail? I may move to other aspects of EvE. Nothing is an absolute, but I am independent because of who I am and what I'm capable of doing.
I still do a little mining, and with that many POSs, I'm always bopping around, not docked all the time. Since the larger corps/Alliances will take down any Citadel/engineering platform when it comes out of reinforcement, the only way to anchor one is to "get lucky".
Kind of sounds like EvE is becoming the land of Cattle Barons. Buy the hired guns and drive the sheep herders and farmers off the grazing land for the good of the town. (Which means their own good.) I begrudge no one the style they want to play, but don't belittle the small people.
That's the rant for this evening. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2816
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 00:50:47 -
[526] - Quote
Baldin Tarmain wrote:Querns wrote:SnakeTheBest wrote: what will happen to the solo moon operations?? there will be space for that too on the new mechanics? i know ppl that run maybe a couple of moons to do reactions for personal earnings, their buisness will be death then?
You'll still be able to do reactions alone. Moon mining can be, too, but not as effectively, since you'll have to undock to mine stuff. I run 8 moons in Lo-Sec. Half my reaction materials come from mined moongoo. All the composites go into the market. Will I run 1..or 2 with the new mechanic? Maybe. How many independents like me are out there? If you have a stat that limits the impact to the economy I would like to see it. Not saying it's not there, just don't know. I run over 2 billion isk a week in composites. Are there a hundred like me? A thousand? How many will stop completely or severely curtail? I may move to other aspects of EvE. Nothing is an absolute, but I am independent because of who I am and what I'm capable of doing. I still do a little mining, and with that many POSs, I'm always bopping around, not docked all the time. Since the larger corps/Alliances will take down any Citadel/engineering platform when it comes out of reinforcement, the only way to anchor one is to "get lucky". Kind of sounds like EvE is becoming the land of Cattle Barons. Buy the hired guns and drive the sheep herders and farmers off the grazing land for the good of the town. (Which means their own good.) I begrudge no one the style they want to play, but don't belittle the small people. That's the rant for this evening.
You can run reactions without mining any moons at all. It's typically how I do them, when I'm in the High Effort phase of Eve Online: Noted Space-themed Spreadsheet.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo
323
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 02:33:41 -
[527] - Quote
From the Dev Blog "These service modules will enable reactions as a new type of industry, using the same interface as manufacturing and research."
So since they are moving over to the industry interface, will any NPC stations located in low/0.0 offer reaction services now? Or will this be the only industry area you will have to purchase a structure to get into? |
Penance Toralen
Compass Fox
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 03:26:51 -
[528] - Quote
Citika wrote:The new moon mining mechanic will be huge. The biggest impact this will have is removing AFK, top-level income from alliances and coalitions and replacing it with active, character-based income. This can only be a good thing overall, but the implementation needs to be small enough that an entire fleet doesn't need to be formed to wipe a moon belt, but also big enough that one person (or a small gang) can't wipe the belt within a few hours.
The raw materials by themselves are next to worthless. Since when has any miner ever been able to dictate the price/worth of their time and effort? Without Refining or Reaction - which is through an asset owned by a corp or a "one-man alt" corp (i.e. the Alliance). It remains top level, because the value is controlled there. The end product will be still be managed by select persons, instead of individuals. 50 miners are not flying into Jita, just a single freighter can do that.
Mining remains significantly an AFK activity. Unless the pilot is micro-managing the ore transfer from the smaller ore-hold of a Covetor or Hulk. Of course, CCP could always disable auto-cycle on strips. That would end the AFK menace so many fear.
|
DK52BS
BRUTAL GENESIS GaNg BaNg TeAm
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 08:40:50 -
[529] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:My initial thoughts on these proposed changes are that it penalizes small, specialised corporations and alliances whilst simultaneously making a lot easier for the larger alliances with support networks, either rental alliances or diversified memberships. More money going to the select few which exacerbates the problems in Eve.
My corporation has a modest moon mining operation. It pays the bills and limited SRP for our members. We are not rich to begin with and, being specialised as PvP, make less per month than your average incursion runner makes in a day. Similarly, our Alliance isn't big. like us it's specialized along PvP lines. We don't have copious amounts of Titans, our R64s pay for a modest SRP programme to help everyone enjoy doing what they do.
We now need to diversify and find miners. Miners aren't going to mine for nothing so our already modest income is going to take a significant hit. It means we become less attractive for players than larger alliances whose income will barely be affected with this proposed change. If lots of small, independent alliances go under and all Eve is left with is large power blocs, then the game stagnates which not only does that undermine what the new sov attempted to achieve but how is it possibly going to be healthy for the game.
I understand what you're trying to achieve here and I'm fully onboard with having more people in space, it's what the game's desperately needed for years now, but that has to be balanced against the harm you're going to do to those who don't want to be part of major power blocs. You need to find some way to shift the balance of income so it's spread out more evenly across a more diverse player base rather than trying to force square pegs into round holes.
Actually this change is going to make your life and your master's (The-Culture) life a bit more difficult. All the moons in Fountain are currently owned by The-Culture and every time we reinforce a POS they pretty much blob us on the defense timer. There is no way a small group of 30-40 active fleet members to take a POS from big alliances. The current systems is in favor of the "big and numerous" providing lots of ISK from remote locations for minimum effort even when they are inactive or offline. The changes introduced by CCP will bring balance to moon harvesting. Having active players mining moons 10-15 times every two weeks or perhaps every day (depending on your setup) is a lot of content and a lot of opportunities for ambushing and guerrilla warfare.
in regards of SRP programs... there hundreds of ways in Eve to earn ISK and establish a suitable SRP. We don't have any r64s and I must say that our SRP is very generous and it is working very well.
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 10:19:18 -
[530] - Quote
I've seen some nice spins on trying to justify this idea the biggest being the removal of top-level income for alliances. My response to that is you're doing a good job at trying to frame it in your favor but it isn't with me and I can see right through it.
1. No matter what part of level you play Eve at you can always create top level afk income. I've seen alliances adopt a fee base income, I've seen alliance adopt ratting and mining ops where there is a certain quota of isk to generate and give to the alliance. I've seen alliance leaders rent out systems to corps I've seen alliance leaders rent out particular constellations I've seen alliances adopt a "pay us to keep you safe" model I've seen alliances own the good moons I've not seen many alliances cap moons that don't have materials to mine and done reactions
So really your argument about removing top level afk alliance income is fraud as there are other ways in which alliances generate their income.
Once you remove the sugar of the cool piece of rock that has been cut away from the moon, this is nothing but a mining operation that once again could be turned into AFK top level alliance income. Only this time more lemmings are required to be involved in meeting mind numbing mining quota's because apparently this will generate "more content"....
Get bent.
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2825
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 10:49:02 -
[531] - Quote
DK52BS wrote:in regards of SRP programs... there hundreds of ways in Eve to earn ISK and establish a suitable SRP. We don't have any r64s and I must say that our SRP is very generous and it is working very well.
Preach it, brother. It's one thing for me to yell loudly at clouds about how to fund SRP programs, but quite another seeing another group actually getting it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2825
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 10:50:31 -
[532] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:I've seen some nice spins on trying to justify this idea the biggest being the removal of top-level income for alliances. My response to that is you're doing a good job at trying to frame it in your favor but it isn't with me and I can see right through it.
1. No matter what part of level you play Eve at you can always create top level afk income. I've seen alliances adopt a fee base income, I've seen alliance adopt ratting and mining ops where there is a certain quota of isk to generate and give to the alliance. I've seen alliance leaders rent out systems to corps I've seen alliance leaders rent out particular constellations I've seen alliances adopt a "pay us to keep you safe" model I've seen alliances own the good moons I've not seen many alliances cap moons that don't have materials to mine and done reactions
So really your argument about removing top level afk alliance income is fraud as there are other ways in which alliances generate their income.
Once you remove the sugar of the cool piece of rock that has been cut away from the moon, this is nothing but a mining operation that once again could be turned into AFK top level alliance income. Only this time more lemmings are required to be involved in meeting mind numbing mining quota's because apparently this will generate "more content"....
Get bent.
This isn't what "top-down income" means.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
18
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 11:17:01 -
[533] - Quote
Querns wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:I've seen some nice spins on trying to justify this idea the biggest being the removal of top-level income for alliances. My response to that is you're doing a good job at trying to frame it in your favor but it isn't with me and I can see right through it.
1. No matter what part of level you play Eve at you can always create top level afk income. I've seen alliances adopt a fee base income, I've seen alliance adopt ratting and mining ops where there is a certain quota of isk to generate and give to the alliance. I've seen alliance leaders rent out systems to corps I've seen alliance leaders rent out particular constellations I've seen alliances adopt a "pay us to keep you safe" model I've seen alliances own the good moons I've not seen many alliances cap moons that don't have materials to mine and done reactions
So really your argument about removing top level afk alliance income is fraud as there are other ways in which alliances generate their income.
Once you remove the sugar of the cool piece of rock that has been cut away from the moon, this is nothing but a mining operation that once again could be turned into AFK top level alliance income. Only this time more lemmings are required to be involved in meeting mind numbing mining quota's because apparently this will generate "more content"....
Get bent.
This isn't what "top-down income" means.
And yet it does not invalidate the observations. Nor the underlying reality.
But he can rest assured, CCP isn't dumb, they know the game by now. Nobody recognises the #narratives as valid arguments. Which is fine, that's an entirely different arena being played for - the focus of all this is not only entirely different, it's focused on completely different things.
|
Aves Asio
56
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 11:32:33 -
[534] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote: CCP isn't dumb, they know the game by now.
LOL |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2828
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 11:37:22 -
[535] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:I've seen some nice spins on trying to justify this idea the biggest being the removal of top-level income for alliances. My response to that is you're doing a good job at trying to frame it in your favor but it isn't with me and I can see right through it.
1. No matter what part of level you play Eve at you can always create top level afk income. I've seen alliances adopt a fee base income, I've seen alliance adopt ratting and mining ops where there is a certain quota of isk to generate and give to the alliance. I've seen alliance leaders rent out systems to corps I've seen alliance leaders rent out particular constellations I've seen alliances adopt a "pay us to keep you safe" model I've seen alliances own the good moons I've not seen many alliances cap moons that don't have materials to mine and done reactions
So really your argument about removing top level afk alliance income is fraud as there are other ways in which alliances generate their income.
Once you remove the sugar of the cool piece of rock that has been cut away from the moon, this is nothing but a mining operation that once again could be turned into AFK top level alliance income. Only this time more lemmings are required to be involved in meeting mind numbing mining quota's because apparently this will generate "more content"....
Get bent.
This isn't what "top-down income" means. And yet it does not invalidate the observations. Nor the underlying reality. But he can rest assured, CCP isn't dumb, they know the game by now. Nobody recognises the #narratives as valid arguments. Which is fine, that's an entirely different arena being played for - the focus of all this is not only entirely different, it's focused on completely different things.
It does. He's trying to twist "top-down income" into "all alliance income." No one is arguing against the removal of alliance income, least of all me.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Doc J
Space Mutts Solyaris Chtonium
18
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 11:40:57 -
[536] - Quote
Querns wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:I've seen some nice spins on trying to justify this idea the biggest being the removal of top-level income for alliances. My response to that is you're doing a good job at trying to frame it in your favor but it isn't with me and I can see right through it.
1. No matter what part of level you play Eve at you can always create top level afk income. I've seen alliances adopt a fee base income, I've seen alliance adopt ratting and mining ops where there is a certain quota of isk to generate and give to the alliance. I've seen alliance leaders rent out systems to corps I've seen alliance leaders rent out particular constellations I've seen alliances adopt a "pay us to keep you safe" model I've seen alliances own the good moons I've not seen many alliances cap moons that don't have materials to mine and done reactions
So really your argument about removing top level afk alliance income is fraud as there are other ways in which alliances generate their income.
Once you remove the sugar of the cool piece of rock that has been cut away from the moon, this is nothing but a mining operation that once again could be turned into AFK top level alliance income. Only this time more lemmings are required to be involved in meeting mind numbing mining quota's because apparently this will generate "more content"....
Get bent.
This isn't what "top-down income" means.
First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean?
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2828
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 12:09:28 -
[537] - Quote
Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean?
"Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all.
This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income.
In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Doc J
Space Mutts Solyaris Chtonium
18
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 13:59:47 -
[538] - Quote
Querns wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean? "Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all. This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income. In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income.
Understood in my opinion T2 is dead, Low sec pvp alliances and corps will die, the situation of alliances holding moons will continue to exist (the only saving grace is the ability for multiple drilling rigs to be anchored on a moon) and I think stagnation will continue.
Top-down income vs bottom up income isn't really that much of a big issue. Top-down income occurs because line members allow it to. And they probably allow it to because they buy into the why of the alliance and its leadership. Usually this is in the form of content and SRP initiatives.
Currently: Cap moon -> Fuel pos -> wait x days -> empty silos -> fuel pos -> wait x days -> empty pos
New system Cap moon -> fuel rig -> wait x days -> mine rocks -> fuel rig -> wait x days -> mine rocks
Seems like someone has forgotten people have lives to live.
Being able to continue to collect resources when you are not signed in used to be one of the lures of playing the game. Notice I said resource collection and no mention of passive vs active. The act of resource collection is passive but the actions required in moving resources to markets is very much an active dangerous task. Needless to say I still don't think the issue is moon mining. This gameplay created combat and diverse situations requiring diplomacy. If this really is to be the new way materials are collected for t2 production I think there are better forms of entertainment in other MMORGP's. It's hard to see what exaclty Fozzie's visions is for Eve.
That's my 2 cents, i dislike the direction of drilling rigs. I would have preferred Fozzie come up with ways in which people can disrupt supply. I predict plenty of AFK cloakies and alliance spai's gaining intel on when rocks are mineable. and i see people saying **** this I can get just as much entertainment from an alpha clone. |
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2112
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 16:06:26 -
[539] - Quote
Doc J wrote:
Seems like someone has forgotten people have lives to live.
Following this no ISK making activity should exist at all. Ships and stuff should be provided by the game to each player.
Players have lives!
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 16:15:33 -
[540] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:....................
Players have lives!
Indeed they do - which is why we need games that are worth playing...
EVE is just about the only one that is.
For that reason, there will be players that have to limit themselves to what they, personally and alone sometimes, can achieve.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3176
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 17:27:58 -
[541] - Quote
Querns wrote:DK52BS wrote:in regards of SRP programs... there hundreds of ways in Eve to earn ISK and establish a suitable SRP. We don't have any r64s and I must say that our SRP is very generous and it is working very well.
Preach it, brother. It's one thing for me to yell loudly at clouds about how to fund SRP programs, but quite another seeing another group actually getting it. Banging your head against rocks does not necessarily make the rocks smarter |
Jake Chely
Star Nation Elemental Tide
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 18:05:08 -
[542] - Quote
Hi.
Not sure the question was asked : Do you plan on introducing a Scrapmetal rig ? Some nullsec outposts can have a pretty good bonus to item reprocessing. There is no way to have such a bonus in Citadels for the moment. |
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
18
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 19:31:12 -
[543] - Quote
Querns wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean? "Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all. This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income. In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income.
Actually, no. It's the top of a chain or network hub. Not actors at the top of an organisation. There could be overlap, there could be control, rules, regulations, mechanisms - whatever. But they are not by default the same. Keep in mind that chains as well as networks are their own actors in human organisational models and structures. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2832
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 20:12:57 -
[544] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Querns wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean? "Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all. This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income. In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income. Actually, no. It's the top of a chain or network hub. Not actors at the top of an organisation. There could be overlap, there could be control, rules, regulations, mechanisms - whatever. But they are not by default the same. Keep in mind that chains as well as networks are their own actors in human organisational models and structures.
This pseudointellectual garbage has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
RavenGalactic
Korvinus
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 05:27:45 -
[545] - Quote
Hola Devaritos,
Will the distribution of moon materials stay the same per moon?
I don't believe that changing the composition of moons will benefit the game. I want to see the distribution of moon goo stay the same. Here's why:
1. Change the harvesting techniques, not what can be harvested. - Any change in the structure of what moon materials are where, will significantly disrupt the market as a whole. The only reason that certain moon materials and their products are more profitable is based on accessibility, how common they are, and what can be produced with them. Many profitable moons are in low-use systems, which would make these systems more contentious for corps and alliances to battle it out for the resources. It will give the low-use systems another source for content. So change the game-play, not the composition.
2. Make the harvesting structures more vulnerable. - Shaking up the ability of large organizations to harvest moon goo over the long-term is the key to providing content, NOT making making more goo accessible to individual players and corps. Giving small organizations access to small amounts of expensive goo disrupts the supply and demand of the game. A lot of players and organizations with a little goo makes getting the end products necessary for production of ships and so on much harder.
3. Don't change for the sake of change. - Balances of power over resources make the game. We need hard to get goo for the reason that it's hard to get. Making goo "equally" accessible will take away another avenue for players and organizations to be capitalistic. The goal of EVE isn't to make ISK, it's to make ALOT of ISK. If there is one less avenue to get far ahead of your peers, there will be one less reason to play. Being better than the next guy/gal is a STRONG part of this game.
"Space, Liberty, and the Pursuit of ISK"
So PLEASE leave the distribution of moon materials per moon in place. EVE isn't a democracy, it's war and hell and Conan the Barbarian.
Out.
RG |
Ghost Blackman
Negative or Positive
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 10:04:19 -
[546] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
Here's the first set of Q&A after the early feedback and discussion:
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today.
Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature. However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon.
MY PLAYER IDEAS FOR GUIDE CHANGES.
Just change the role of the Siphons Units to be allowed in normal belts and suck the rock up in small mounts. Anyone should be allow to take from it. But if they do in empire can be flag for can stealing.
Comet mining should take place in the game too. You may ask what is this or how should it work? Well I can only point to how. Comet Path Finding
Risk Vs. Reward.
So you warp and make safe and that's the easy part. Setting up the medium refinery into path of the comets.' Capital size Tractor Beams will pull the comet and pull it closer. Once this comet get close the refinery will shoot it's weapons to break off parts of the comet. Leaving behind belts to mine from. As the comet will break away parts and keep going. Enjoy.
OR
So you warp and make safe and that's the easy part. Setting up the medium refinery into path of the comets.' Capital size Tractor Beams will slow the comet and pull it closer. Once this comet get close the refinery will shoot it's weapons to break the comet. Leaving behind belts to mine from. Enjoy.
This will be the last ideas which I will give. I glad CCP look into my ideas of changing the types of remote burst and doomdays types. :) If they want more ideas they know how to get hold of me. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2836
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:52:05 -
[547] - Quote
Ghost Blackman wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
Here's the first set of Q&A after the early feedback and discussion:
Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system? A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Q: Will Rorquals be able to dock in the large refinery? A: Yes. The medium refineries will have the same docking restrictions as Astrahus and Raitarus, while the large will allow those ships plus the Rorqual thanks to dedicated Rorqual docking facilities. Non-Rorqual capitals will not be able to dock in the large refinery however.
Q: What types of ships will be able to mine the new ore spawned by moon mining events? A: The new ores won't require special ships to mine. They'll be minable with the normal ore mining ships that are available today.
Q: Will the new moon ore require new types of mining lasers and drones to mine? A: Our current plan is to use the same mining lasers, strip miners and mining drones that currently mine the existing types of ore. We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about this however, and are keeping our options open.
Q: Can this new moon mining mechanic be expanded to include highsec and wormhole space? A: As we mentioned in the blog we think this general mechanic has potential in other areas of space, but we're not currently planning on opening up collection of T2 moon materials into areas beyond lowsec and nullsec. We've run the number and we don't think diluting the sources of T2 materials across more areas of space would be beneficial to the feature. However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. For the first release we need to keep a reasonable scope so any expansion of that kind would need to come later if it comes. That also means that if we expand this gameplay to other resources in other areas we'll be able to integrate the lessons learned from the first release.
Q: Will starbases (POS) be removed when this feature is released? A: No, the removal of starbases will be a gradual process and even with the release of refineries there will still be major starbase functions that are not yet replicated by new structures (cyno beacons, cyno jammers and jump bridges). We will have some news on the next steps towards the starbase phase out soon. MY PLAYER IDEAS FOR GUIDE CHANGES. Just change the role of the Siphons Units to be allowed in normal belts and suck the rock up in small mounts. Anyone should be allow to take from it. But if they do in empire can be flag for can stealing. Comet mining should take place in the game too. You may ask what is this or how should it work? Well I can only point to how. Comet Path FindingRisk Vs. Reward.So you warp and make safe and that's the easy part. Setting up the medium refinery into path of the comets.' Capital size Tractor Beams will pull the comet and pull it closer. Once this comet get close the refinery will shoot it's weapons to break off parts of the comet. Leaving behind belts to mine from. As the comet will break away parts and keep going. Enjoy. OR So you warp and make safe and that's the easy part. Setting up the medium refinery into path of the comets.' Capital size Tractor Beams will slow the comet and pull it closer. Once this comet get close the refinery will shoot it's weapons to break the comet. Leaving behind belts to mine from. Enjoy. Comet fishing :) They're not going to replace what they've already worked on with a whole new thing, that requires new art and everything.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
asho Armer
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 20:42:17 -
[548] - Quote
forget hi sec all ccp need to do is bring moon mining to, wh, space |
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
245
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 21:55:21 -
[549] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses.
I'd lean more toward T3 Gas harvesting if you anchor them to suns (special suns in wormholes).
Instead up tractoring up a moon pie, you'd be clustering super-heated plasma. The moon detonation phase would shift to triggering a 12hr-24hr solar flare event that blocks out dscan visibility of people on grid with the sun and shortens probe life to 5 minutes...or something along those lines.
'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4
|
Ghost Blackman
Negative or Positive
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 00:09:25 -
[550] - Quote
Not replace but adding on to the current feature. They said they were looking into other ways to gather resources for solar systems. So take this new feature and add on to it with comet mining and add the new moon mining idea.
MY PLAYER IDEAS FOR GUIDE CHANGES.
Just change the role of the Siphons Units to be allowed in normal belts and suck the rock up in small mounts. Anyone should be allow to take from it. But if they do in empire can be flag for can stealing.
Comet mining should take place in the game too. You may ask what is this or how should it work? Well I can only point to how. Comet Path Finding
Risk Vs. Reward.
So you warp and make safe and that's the easy part. Setting up the medium refinery into path of the comets.' Capital size Tractor Beams will pull the comet and pull it closer. Once this comet get close the refinery will shoot it's weapons to break off parts of the comet. Leaving behind belts to mine from. As the comet will break away parts and keep going. Enjoy.
OR
So you warp and make safe and that's the easy part. Setting up the medium refinery into path of the comets.' Capital size Tractor Beams will slow the comet and pull it closer. Once this comet get close the refinery will shoot it's weapons to break the comet. Leaving behind belts to mine from. Enjoy.
Comet fishing :)[/quote] They're not going to replace what they've already worked on with a whole new thing, that requires new art and everything.[/quote] |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services Singularity Syndicate
2126
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 15:32:14 -
[551] - Quote
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:However in future iterations we would be very interested in investigating expanding this same "scheduled mining event" gameplay to all areas of space using different resources. These might take the form of new resources or allowing the collection of existing resources such as normal minerals or T3 gasses. I'd lean more toward T3 Gas harvesting if you anchor them to suns (special suns in wormholes). Instead up tractoring up a moon pie, you'd be clustering super-heated plasma. The moon detonation phase would shift to triggering a 12hr-24hr solar flare event that blocks out dscan visibility of people on grid with the sun and shortens probe life to 5 minutes...or something along those lines.
MIght be nice to make WH space unique by having the moonpie break into random chunks of random materials from any sec space. So you'd get some ore, moongoo, ice, T3 gas, booster gas etc in varying amounts from none to full on nullsec size chunks
Lorewise this would be because the materials available are from accretion of materials from the impact of comets/asteroids on the surface given that most useful stuff was mined out by the sleepers. |
Pisyha
Random inactiva corporation
9
|
Posted - 2017.03.31 09:03:35 -
[552] - Quote
Know what would go hand in hand with this?
Covert exhumers.
ORE looks to new frontiers as the competition close to home is too high, those neighbours minerals sure do look nice. Hit n run mine, covert haulers already exist. Black ops bridge can bridge em. |
Gaius Clabbacus
Basket of Deplorables
43
|
Posted - 2017.03.31 11:27:31 -
[553] - Quote
Pisyha wrote:Know what would go hand in hand with this?
Covert exhumers.
ORE looks to new frontiers as the competition close to home is too high, those neighbours minerals sure do look nice. Hit n run mine, covert haulers already exist. Black ops bridge can bridge em.
They are called Prospects, look them. |
Sylvia Kildare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 00:49:01 -
[554] - Quote
AOAm Adranas'Lira wrote:I like the sounds of this.
My only comments would be I understand not diluting the T2 resources pool down by adding mineable moons all over high sec. Risk verses rewards must stay balanced. I do think it would be interesting though see drills being deployed somehow in high sec though. If it is introducted it should be restricted to 0.5, perhaps 0.7 systems or lower. I also came up with two other options for deployment.
1. Moon mining activity spawns standard ores for collection (Veldspar, Plagioclase, etc). Maybe some mid-grade ores. I realize this doesn't fall in line with the idea of moon goo, but just a thought. 2. If moon products were introduced into high sec, they need to be lower value, and lower qualities than would be present else where in space (null, etc). Important to keep risk/reward in check. This is were usage in lower security system would be important; so they wouldn't pop up everywhere.
Thanks for the info Fozzie.
I've heard some suggest that if they added the ability to pull chunks of mooncrust up in highsec, that it should only yield highsec ore/minerals instead of t2.
Others have said that tritanium is often a bottleneck in WHs and maybe a WH refinery should be given the option to pull up a ton of trit along with the t2 mats. |
3xAWarpNinja Hilanen
High Flyers Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2017.04.02 17:13:54 -
[555] - Quote
So i had a thought on this issue, risk vs reward can be possibly more accurately represented by doing something like keeping the old system whilst also adding the new system, now before you splurge and say HURR DURR THIS IS A BAD IDEA, hear me out. the idea being that the refineries themselves have 2 modes, the bulk mining mode, which ill refer to as the 'new' mode, and the normal mining mode, which ill refer to as the 'old' now with keeping the old mode the numbers for goo generated should be less than current generation by poses(to keep t2 costs stable) whilst adding the new mode into the refineries which would produce huge amounts of moon minerals by the process detailed in the devblog, which allows players to RISK their mining ships/time/money whilst possibly getting the REWARD of getting greatly increased mineral output for that particular moon.
Just my 2 cents |
Just Mental
Dark Skies Dojo
0
|
Posted - 2017.04.04 07:35:42 -
[556] - Quote
Ofc wormhole space gets left out again as Null gets new ways to get resources and new content, As if the gas harvesting hasnt been touched in years and wormhole space doesnt have a steady stream of ore sites at 1 time... Been almost a month before and not even seen an ore site in 1 system.. but oh yet just let Null get all the attention as it controls production ,Seems like a plan |
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2122
|
Posted - 2017.04.04 09:50:57 -
[557] - Quote
Just Mental wrote:Ofc wormhole space gets left out again as Null gets new ways to get resources and new content, As if the gas harvesting hasnt been touched in years and wormhole space doesnt have a steady stream of ore sites at 1 time... Been almost a month before and not even seen an ore site in 1 system.. but oh yet just let Null get all the attention as it controls production ,Seems like a plan Wormholes are supposed to make you farm other holes and not sit in your own with closed entrances.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2842
|
Posted - 2017.04.06 12:27:10 -
[558] - Quote
Just Mental wrote:Ofc wormhole space gets left out again as Null gets new ways to get resources and new content, As if the gas harvesting hasnt been touched in years and wormhole space doesnt have a steady stream of ore sites at 1 time... Been almost a month before and not even seen an ore site in 1 system.. but oh yet just let Null get all the attention as it controls production ,Seems like a plan
I mean, I'd like to be able to close off access to my space completely and harvest as much ore as possible, but it's not going to happen. Same for you.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Just Mental
Dark Skies Dojo
0
|
Posted - 2017.04.09 00:13:16 -
[559] - Quote
Querns wrote:Just Mental wrote:Ofc wormhole space gets left out again as Null gets new ways to get resources and new content, As if the gas harvesting hasnt been touched in years and wormhole space doesnt have a steady stream of ore sites at 1 time... Been almost a month before and not even seen an ore site in 1 system.. but oh yet just let Null get all the attention as it controls production ,Seems like a plan I mean, I'd like to be able to close off access to my space completely and harvest as much ore as possible, but it's not going to happen. Same for you. No that would take the danger of wh space out of it. Yea you can close your holes but and maybe get a few hours of undisturbed sites if by chance a k162 doesnt open up to you with hostiles but the the point is that theyr now gonna let null pull resouces just a ways off their citidels tobe harvested.. I mean really lol |
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2130
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 07:01:58 -
[560] - Quote
Just Mental wrote:Querns wrote:Just Mental wrote:Ofc wormhole space gets left out again as Null gets new ways to get resources and new content, As if the gas harvesting hasnt been touched in years and wormhole space doesnt have a steady stream of ore sites at 1 time... Been almost a month before and not even seen an ore site in 1 system.. but oh yet just let Null get all the attention as it controls production ,Seems like a plan I mean, I'd like to be able to close off access to my space completely and harvest as much ore as possible, but it's not going to happen. Same for you. No that would take the danger of wh space out of it. Yea you can close your holes but and maybe get a few hours of undisturbed sites if by chance a k162 doesnt open up to you with hostiles but the the point is that theyr now gonna let null pull resouces just a ways off their citidels tobe harvested.. I mean really lol ... and then you get special notification don't you?
Yeah, WHs are different and it should be kept in mind when you ask for J-space features.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
|
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
1210
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 17:39:29 -
[561] - Quote
After watching and not hearing anything on a couple ideas for the upcoming changes....
1. Please allow for filtered/selected refineries to appear on overview. I don't want 87 bazillion refineries from all over the system to show up when I only need one that matters. I'm sure the rest will mater for mining, but not all the time (like POSs are now). Currently it's all or none for Upwell structure types...
2. To reduce the obvious hysteria on patch day, please allow for the following consideration... All POSs that currently have active moon mining are automatically converted to the new structure patch day. This will be by placing the packed structure in the cargo hold of the POS before patch day. All POSs that have a structure (Med or Large) on patch day will be automatically converted to the new refinery - one-time-only deal. No anchoring timers, no New Eden Moon Rush 2017 type hysteria. If you own the moon and are mining the moon, you get the moon patch day with the new structure.
All items that were part of the old POS are placed in the refinery delivery for the POS owner. TBD maybe.
3. I find it hard to believe that it's no problem to tractor a huge moon chunk from the planet, but not capable of hauling the asteroids into the refinery station proper. some slow mechanic for a slow passive maintenance of the asteroid field should be included. Nothing too far fetched, but some mechanic that can be adjusted by CCP to make sure the gears of industry keep turning. this change to moon mining is a BIG change. we don;t know how big and possibly damaging change this might be. If it's not hurtful to the gears, then all the better. If you don't plan for success, the you did not plan.
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
171
|
Posted - 2017.04.12 00:16:45 -
[562] - Quote
AFK Hauler wrote:After watching and not hearing anything on a couple ideas for the upcoming changes....
1. Please allow for filtered/selected refineries to appear on overview. I don't want 87 bazillion refineries from all over the system to show up when I only need one that matters. I'm sure the rest will mater for mining, but not all the time (like POSs are now). Currently it's all or none for Upwell structure types...
2. To reduce the obvious hysteria on patch day, please allow for the following consideration... All POSs that currently have active moon mining are automatically converted to the new structure patch day. This will be by placing the packed Refinery (M or L) structure in some cargo hold of the POS (or just dumped in space inside the shield) before patch day. All POSs that have a structure (Med or Large) on patch day will be automatically converted to the new refinery - one-time-only deal. No anchoring timers, no New Eden Moon Rush 2017 type hysteria. If you own the moon and are mining the moon, you get the moon patch day with the new structure.
All items that were part of the old POS are placed in the refinery delivery for the POS owner. TBD maybe.
This is supposing that we will have the opportunity of manufacturing before patch day... Moon rush and build rush on the same day - epic rant day for sure.
3. I find it hard to believe that it's no problem to tractor a huge moon chunk from the planet, but not capable of hauling the asteroids into the refinery station proper. Some slow mechanic for a slow passive maintenance of the asteroid field should be included. Nothing too far fetched, but some mechanic that can be adjusted by CCP to make sure the gears of industry keep turning. This change to moon mining is a BIG change, and I'd like to see more "knobs" implemented to make adjustments as needed. We don't know how big and possibly damaging change this might be. If it's not hurtful to the gears of industry, then all the better. If you don't plan for success, the you did not plan. 1. CCP wont do that because it is too clean 2.that could be some tricky stuff 3. Smart... too smart |
Doc J
Space Mutts Solyaris Chtonium
18
|
Posted - 2017.04.18 14:30:49 -
[563] - Quote
Querns wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean? "Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all. This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income. In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income.
I guess FanFest has changed your opinion on this change? |
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
1211
|
Posted - 2017.04.21 13:39:16 -
[564] - Quote
Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean? "Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all. This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income. In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income. I guess FanFest has changed your opinion on this change?
Another economic factor that's being ignored is the total value displacement by these changes. Right now the moon goo economy is only so big for a single income flow, that is - it's limited to the current number of people participating in moon mining. That includes the investors, producers, reactors, sellers and consumers. That pie has a specific economic size based on the value of each material in the production to consumption chain. Each player gets a specific slice of the pie, which is monetized by the end user.
The size of the pie stays the same under the current proposed changes with the added slice going to a new level of interaction, which is the production. Previously that was a slice that was consumed by a corporation or alliance. However, now that slice will be consumed by everyone who mines the minerals. The level of labor not accounted for in these changes will cause upward pressure on the end consumer to support the new labor activity.
The only relief to the upward pressure is to increase supply to spread the economic burden of production. Someone is going to get paid for their labor one way or another. Keeping the supply at the current level will drive the costs upwards to support the new layer of labor required to produce T2 materials.
If there is no economic relief on the end user, the result will be a natural shift towards capital and faction ships.
Bottom up economics got a new step in the ladder that is not receiving attention or balance.
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.04.23 21:50:51 -
[565] - Quote
AFK Hauler wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:Doc J wrote:Querns wrote:This isn't what "top-down income" means. First time I've seen the thread but caught my eye on this, what does top-down income mean? "Top-down" income refers to an alliance funding source that is collected solely by actors at the top of an organization, then is dispersed downwards onto line members. (Assuming it doesn't get embezzled.) Moongoo is the archetype of top-down income, as it's handled by the alliance's logistics dudes and line members aren't involved at all. This is in contrast to "bottom-up" income, where line members perform the money-making activity, and the alliance takes a small slice, usually through taxes. Ratting is the archetype of bottom-up income. In this instance, CCP is shifting moongoo from top-down to bottom-up income. I guess FanFest has changed your opinion on this change? Another economic factor that's being ignored is the total value displacement by these changes. Right now the moon goo economy is only so big for a single income flow, that is - it's limited to the current number of people participating in moon mining. That includes the investors, producers, reactors, sellers and consumers. That pie has a specific economic size based on the value of each material in the production to consumption chain. Each player gets a specific slice of the pie, which is monetized by the end user. The size of the pie stays the same under the current proposed changes with the added slice going to a new level of interaction, which is the production. Previously that was a slice that was consumed by a corporation or alliance. However, now that slice will be consumed by everyone who mines the minerals. The level of labor not accounted for in these changes will cause upward pressure on the end consumer to support the new labor activity. The only relief to the upward pressure is to increase supply to spread the economic burden of production. Someone is going to get paid for their labor one way or another. Keeping the supply at the current level will drive the costs upwards to support the new layer of labor required to produce T2 materials. If there is no economic relief on the end user, the result will be a natural shift towards capital and faction ships. Bottom up economics got a new step in the ladder that is not receiving attention or balance.
I think the players are aware but Fozzie has curtains over his eyes.
I too wonder if Querns has changed his mind after fanfest? |
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
37
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 16:44:00 -
[566] - Quote
AFK Hauler wrote: Another economic factor that's being ignored is the total value displacement by these changes. Right now the moon goo economy is only so big for a single income flow, that is - it's limited to the current number of people participating in moon mining. That includes the investors, producers, reactors, sellers and consumers. That pie has a specific economic size based on the value of each material in the production to consumption chain. Each player gets a specific slice of the pie, which is monetized by the end user.
The size of the pie stays the same under the current proposed changes with the added slice going to a new level of interaction, which is the production. Previously that was a slice that was consumed by a corporation or alliance. However, now that slice will be consumed by everyone who mines the minerals. The level of labor not accounted for in these changes will cause upward pressure on the end consumer to support the new labor activity.
The only relief to the upward pressure is to increase supply to spread the economic burden of production. Someone is going to get paid for their labor one way or another. Keeping the supply at the current level will drive the costs upwards to support the new layer of labor required to produce T2 materials.
If there is no economic relief on the end user, the result will be a natural shift towards capital and faction ships.
Bottom up economics got a new step in the ladder that is not receiving attention or balance.
What matters isn't so much the number of people involved its the total man hours or character hours (mining alts count). Right now most of the character hours are used up with hauling materials and reactions babysitting. Will the new system use as many hours hauling and reacting or less? Everyone sees that the mining part time spent is going up substantially, my question to Fozzie is will the amount of hauling remain the same? Will the distribution of moon minerals be the same or can we expect a more homogeneous availability by region outside of the possible lowsec exclusive materials?
Players will always gravitate to what is the best. Faction ships are very cheap relative to the tech 2 and certain tech 2 ships are strategic requirements so very little shift will happen. |
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
1348
|
Posted - 2017.04.25 02:56:01 -
[567] - Quote
As the plan is;
Quote: On patch day we will automatically unfit existing reprocessing rigs that are fit to Citadels and Engineering Complexes so that structure owners can have the option of either fitting their rigs right back on to the same structure or moving those rigs to a Refinery if they wish. Will BPO's for these new structures be available prior to patch day or is the expectation more - reprocessing without any type of bonus until BPO's are researched up, copied and made available via contracts and the structure built?
Removing the rigs to enable owners to fit them to the new structures is a great idea that is wasted if the new structure is not available on the same day.
Just maybe having a 2 week grace period for the removal of these rigs would be a better option OR even allowing owners to remove them when they choose (within a fixed time period). This allows those wishing to fit them to the new structures time to build one without reprocessing ability being stripped away before they can even build the new structure.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Erie TehGM
Capital Fusion. Circle-Of-Two
0
|
Posted - 2017.04.25 08:24:12 -
[568] - Quote
I am excited for this - I always wanted to be as self-sustainable as possible in games. And T2 production was pain regarding that, cause I had to buy (not actually gather by myself) resources for it. So I really welcome this change.
However, I think Moon mining shouldn't be TOO easy to get into. For sure, it will need additional skill. And hopefully different types of lasers, however that's less needed. I am afraid that unless moon rocks will give really small yield per cycle, T2 market will crash. And I personally am against this. Not cause I produce T2 stuff (cause I actually don't, except missiles for my tengu). This has to be really carefully considered so T2 manufacturing doesn't become much easier than it currently is.
More open to more people - hell yeah! Easier and flood of T2 stuff - hell no!
However note: I know nothing about economy, so I may be wrong. However, this is a real concern for me. |
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.05.02 23:34:56 -
[569] - Quote
Erie TehGM wrote:I am excited for this - I always wanted to be as self-sustainable as possible in games. And T2 production was pain regarding that, cause I had to buy (not actually gather by myself) resources for it. So I really welcome this change.
However, I think Moon mining shouldn't be TOO easy to get into. For sure, it will need additional skill. And hopefully different types of lasers, however that's less needed. I am afraid that unless moon rocks will give really small yield per cycle, T2 market will crash. And I personally am against this. Not cause I produce T2 stuff (cause I actually don't, except missiles for my tengu). This has to be really carefully considered so T2 manufacturing doesn't become much easier than it currently is.
More open to more people - hell yeah! Easier and flood of T2 stuff - hell no!
However note: I know nothing about economy, so I may be wrong. However, this is a real concern for me.
What on earth are you smoking? This isn't going to make t2 production self sustaining at all. What curtains do you have over your eyes? |
March rabbit
Mosquito squadron The-Culture
2159
|
Posted - 2017.05.03 12:29:37 -
[570] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:Erie TehGM wrote:I am excited for this - I always wanted to be as self-sustainable as possible in games. And T2 production was pain regarding that, cause I had to buy (not actually gather by myself) resources for it. So I really welcome this change. What on earth are you smoking? This isn't going to make t2 production self sustaining at all. What curtains do you have over your eyes? Sometime when you don't understand it's you fault and not fault of others......
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.05.04 11:59:23 -
[571] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Erie TehGM wrote:I am excited for this - I always wanted to be as self-sustainable as possible in games. And T2 production was pain regarding that, cause I had to buy (not actually gather by myself) resources for it. So I really welcome this change. What on earth are you smoking? This isn't going to make t2 production self sustaining at all. What curtains do you have over your eyes? Sometime when you don't understand it's you fault and not fault of others......
Some people will always have something to say and nothing to contribute. |
March rabbit
Mosquito squadron The-Culture
2165
|
Posted - 2017.05.05 16:22:02 -
[572] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:March rabbit wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Erie TehGM wrote:I am excited for this - I always wanted to be as self-sustainable as possible in games. And T2 production was pain regarding that, cause I had to buy (not actually gather by myself) resources for it. So I really welcome this change. What on earth are you smoking? This isn't going to make t2 production self sustaining at all. What curtains do you have over your eyes? Sometime when you don't understand it's you fault and not fault of others...... Some people will always have something to say and nothing to contribute. Yeah, i could say it this way but now you said it yourself.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
ll Kuray ll
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2017.05.06 01:56:41 -
[573] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:March rabbit wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:Erie TehGM wrote:I am excited for this - I always wanted to be as self-sustainable as possible in games. And T2 production was pain regarding that, cause I had to buy (not actually gather by myself) resources for it. So I really welcome this change. What on earth are you smoking? This isn't going to make t2 production self sustaining at all. What curtains do you have over your eyes? Sometime when you don't understand it's you fault and not fault of others...... Some people will always have something to say and nothing to contribute. Yeah, i could say it this way but now you said it yourself.
You trying to degrade me usually means you want to feel empowerment over me. I am honored you tried to insult me. |
Tessa Sage
Legion of the Wicked Way ChaosTheory.
11
|
Posted - 2017.05.22 23:43:55 -
[574] - Quote
ll Kuray ll wrote:March rabbit wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:March rabbit wrote:ll Kuray ll wrote:
What on earth are you smoking? This isn't going to make t2 production self sustaining at all. What curtains do you have over your eyes?
Sometime when you don't understand it's you fault and not fault of others...... Some people will always have something to say and nothing to contribute. Yeah, i could say it this way but now you said it yourself. You trying to degrade me usually means you want to feel empowerment over me. I am honored you tried to insult me.
Gentlemen, there is no fighting in here this is the war room. CCP already stated that instances of passive mining through structure improvements will not exceed or otherwise replace active on-grid. Of course, in the case of moon goo, that is POS ownership being rotated out, so you might see the same throughput regardless.
What I'd like both Placid and Reactionary to do here is check their sheets, bed wetting should only occur if you drank too much Kool-Aid at first post. Let's have a civil turn around, face what's coming, and profit mightily. |
ttt esc Ikkala
HIFI Phantoms Northern Associates.
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.17 11:05:04 -
[575] - Quote
Given the cycle time to ge the field upto space where you can mine it i dont see t2 being flooded. I see the oppsoite happen as people miss their field times or set to low a cycle time and field density is too small I can see a t2 prices going up |
ttt esc Ikkala
HIFI Phantoms Northern Associates.
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.02 21:28:24 -
[576] - Quote
Do we have a release date for the moon changes yet?? |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
142
|
Posted - 2017.07.03 16:07:37 -
[577] - Quote
ttt esc Ikkala wrote:Do we have a release date for the moon changes yet??
'Winter' (is coming...)
Best guess - 2 weeks after EVE Vegas on the Tuesday...
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Acac Sunflyier
Control-Space DARKNESS.
683
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 23:11:28 -
[578] - Quote
Few questions:
1) The Reactions themselves, will they all be BPOs?
2) Will all reactions require ice or just moon reactions?
3) Will the distribution of moon materials change to allow for the change in how materials are mined?
|
Azmya Nakamura
Alphahydrae
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.11 14:41:56 -
[579] - Quote
What about wormholes ?
Would it be possible to be able to do moon mining but instead of getting classical moon material we would get enriched asteroids such as in 0,0 belts ?
That would not unbalance the moon mining system in regards of keeping the moon materials in null sec but that could encourage WH inhabitants to anchor theses structures.
If not and unless the costs of reaction (in fuel consumption) is lower, I don't see any of theses structures being built in WH space until the POS are removed.
Thanking you in advance for the feedback.
===> https://alphahydrae.fr <===
|
Bryg Philomena
Kosher Nostra SE7EN-SINS
15
|
Posted - 2017.07.19 17:14:14 -
[580] - Quote
Please for the love of God do not introduce any sort of ledger.
Eve is big and bad and you can steal and lie to your hearts content. Or well, you could but now lets log fleet's loot. Let's log who mined how much.
Lets take the onus off players to be diligent and involved and replace it with a game mechanic. |
|
Jonathan Rotineque
Malleus Clusores Brothers of Tangra
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 02:44:39 -
[581] - Quote
Ice moons?
I saw a wide example of moon and space ores exampled with various densities of each, no ice types were listed. I was wondering if there was any plan on having ice extracted from moons. We do have Ice Planets so Ice Moons do not seem much of a stretch.
Default Warp in points
Since the Refinery will be so close to the ore field, it would seem that a default warp in would be completely unnecessary. Friends could undock from the refinery and warp to any rock in the field. Foes could warp from gate to the moon or structure then warp to any rock.
Speaking of warp in points
Any chance we could return anomaly fields back to signature fields that so we would have to scan them down? Now that Rorquals are on field and locked in place for 5 minutes at a time when deployed. It does not seem too big of an ask that those hunting Rorquals actually have to spend 30 seconds scanning down a self pointed capital ship.
|
Bryg Philomena
Grey Templars Fidelas Constans
15
|
Posted - 2017.07.25 10:53:18 -
[582] - Quote
So basically now an alliance that is moon mining will have dozens of places to dock in each system they're mining in? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: [one page] |