Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 17:17:00 -
[1]
IÆd like to see a comprehensive review of moon-mining in Eve online. At present the fixed distribution model of moon minerals leads to static gameplay in 0.0 as good moons will always be good moons and it encourages alliances to bunker down and turtle to protect the good holdings and regions while caring precisely nothing about bad moons and bad regions.
Would CCP ever consider introducing erosion of minerals on moons? û a system where eventually rare moons will be ômined outö and it will be necessary to rediscover alternative sources and re-establish the POS and equipment at new locations? (Maybe rough timescale for ômining outö a fresh mineral vein would be 2-3 months)
Would CCP be prepared to randomize the process of allocating rare minerals to moons? Perhaps once a particular moon is ômined outö another source of rare minerals is allocated to another moon somewhere else in eve? (this could even be done by classes of moon, ie that the re-allocation would go to the correct class but anywhere in space) And obviously youÆd need to adjust the numbers to ensure that you factor in exploration time and instability into the number of moons needed to support current industry levels.
Would CCP be prepared to change the current fixed regional distribution models to a regional bias (weighted random chance) distribution of minerals û ôfresh ore veinsö?
(I know the original intention was to have certain types of moons in certain regions and for alliances to have to trade and cooperate to exchange these things to drive politics - but it doesnÆt work that way in practise and certain moons are isk-printing machines, other moons are largely worthless in the current model.)
Dysposium Moons = 220m isk per day. Atmospheric Gas Moons =156k isk per day.
Would CCP be prepared to shake up politics and over-stabilized borders in 0.0 by having the rare moons (that are worth mining) get mined out and get randomly respawned in other regions (that will need conquering if existing profit and supply domination is to be maintained)?
We have a suspension of disbelief issue with previously undiscovered rare mineral veins spawning in new regions obviously, but itÆs not much worse than the endless mineral production of moons in hugely industrialized sectors. What I see with the moon mineral distribution mechanics is a chance to spark real wars in 0.0 again û real conflicts aimed at fiscal domination and maintaining control of a vital resource. ItÆd also give more value to the exploration profession (actually finding respawning moons) and bring some much needed balance across the regions. ItÆs quite senseless that there are only a handful of really good regions in 0.0 and lots of bad ones.
IÆm a great believer that Eve should have the ability to provide some lucky breaks to players prepared to do the leg work and take the risks and the principle that BoB and RA could randomly lose some Dysposium Moons that respawn in the middle of Syndicate or Providence frankly makes me smile with the anticipation of virtual bloodshed. Make 0.0 exciting again! Spark wars over moon minerals and regionally-diminishing resources. Make the economic distribution system a little more dynamic and watch war and politics get more interesting û everybody wins.
Now these are very early thoughts, and a broad proposal that basically says ôCan we look at making moon mining more interesting and dynamic?ö
What do people think?
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 17:17:00 -
[2]
IÆd like to see a comprehensive review of moon-mining in Eve online. At present the fixed distribution model of moon minerals leads to static gameplay in 0.0 as good moons will always be good moons and it encourages alliances to bunker down and turtle to protect the good holdings and regions while caring precisely nothing about bad moons and bad regions.
Would CCP ever consider introducing erosion of minerals on moons? û a system where eventually rare moons will be ômined outö and it will be necessary to rediscover alternative sources and re-establish the POS and equipment at new locations? (Maybe rough timescale for ômining outö a fresh mineral vein would be 2-3 months)
Would CCP be prepared to randomize the process of allocating rare minerals to moons? Perhaps once a particular moon is ômined outö another source of rare minerals is allocated to another moon somewhere else in eve? (this could even be done by classes of moon, ie that the re-allocation would go to the correct class but anywhere in space) And obviously youÆd need to adjust the numbers to ensure that you factor in exploration time and instability into the number of moons needed to support current industry levels.
Would CCP be prepared to change the current fixed regional distribution models to a regional bias (weighted random chance) distribution of minerals û ôfresh ore veinsö?
(I know the original intention was to have certain types of moons in certain regions and for alliances to have to trade and cooperate to exchange these things to drive politics - but it doesnÆt work that way in practise and certain moons are isk-printing machines, other moons are largely worthless in the current model.)
Dysposium Moons = 220m isk per day. Atmospheric Gas Moons =156k isk per day.
Would CCP be prepared to shake up politics and over-stabilized borders in 0.0 by having the rare moons (that are worth mining) get mined out and get randomly respawned in other regions (that will need conquering if existing profit and supply domination is to be maintained)?
We have a suspension of disbelief issue with previously undiscovered rare mineral veins spawning in new regions obviously, but itÆs not much worse than the endless mineral production of moons in hugely industrialized sectors. What I see with the moon mineral distribution mechanics is a chance to spark real wars in 0.0 again û real conflicts aimed at fiscal domination and maintaining control of a vital resource. ItÆd also give more value to the exploration profession (actually finding respawning moons) and bring some much needed balance across the regions. ItÆs quite senseless that there are only a handful of really good regions in 0.0 and lots of bad ones.
IÆm a great believer that Eve should have the ability to provide some lucky breaks to players prepared to do the leg work and take the risks and the principle that BoB and RA could randomly lose some Dysposium Moons that respawn in the middle of Syndicate or Providence frankly makes me smile with the anticipation of virtual bloodshed. Make 0.0 exciting again! Spark wars over moon minerals and regionally-diminishing resources. Make the economic distribution system a little more dynamic and watch war and politics get more interesting û everybody wins.
Now these are very early thoughts, and a broad proposal that basically says ôCan we look at making moon mining more interesting and dynamic?ö
What do people think?
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 17:34:00 -
[3]
See also: Moon mineral/gas Originally by: Adeptus mecanicus
my suggestion is to make the minerals/gasses in moons possible to deplete, that it will spawn anew at a random site in eve wll make moons that has dysprosium (well the rare ones) hard to monpolize and gives any alliance a shoot of getting dibbs on one fore a given time. it also will make smaller alliances in lets say empire go to war in more frequent rate over good moon's, also it will make the bigger ones less powerfull since their cash cow's are on the move
PS: also think that goes fore Booster/synth booster sites
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 17:37:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Serenity Steele See also: Moon mineral/gas Originally by: Adeptus mecanicus
my suggestion is to make the minerals/gasses in moons possible to deplete, that it will spawn anew at a random site in eve wll make moons that has dysprosium (well the rare ones) hard to monpolize and gives any alliance a shoot of getting dibbs on one fore a given time. it also will make smaller alliances in lets say empire go to war in more frequent rate over good moon's, also it will make the bigger ones less powerfull since their cash cow's are on the move
PS: also think that goes fore Booster/synth booster sites
Thanks Serenity - yep I missed that one. Good to link the issues.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 17:59:00 -
[5]
Right value ratio?
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Dysposium Moons = 220m isk per day. Atmospheric Gas Moons =156k isk per day.
This ratio (1:0.0007) is comparable with Megacyte@3800 <> [email protected] ratio of 1:0.0009, so the price differential is in line with other game scarcity. The comparison is only rough as Megacyte can be refined from NPC loot drops as well - so it is more difficult to control supply.
Increased warfare?
Originally by: Jade Constantine What I see with the moon mineral distribution mechanics is a chance to spark real wars in 0.0 again û real conflicts aimed at fiscal domination and maintaining control of a vital resource.
I don't think this argument holds up: Fixed/limited resources and the fight for said resources sparks wars, as we see for access to 0.0 space and outposts. Depleting moons enable entities to "wait out" the period of time for the minerals to expire and key trying to "Strike gold".
As you state, having the minerals move about or deplete would benefit the exploration profession by placing emphasis on roaming/intelligence gathering as moons deplete.
Balance Considerations - For depletion to have a significant effect on static territorial control, the randomisation of new minerals would need to be across the universe, otherwise region controlling alliances would simply re-scan their (controlled) space, creating nothing more than annoyance - The supply/duration of the moon minerals would need to be dispplayed in the client (eg. Tower management control) to determine the longevity of each moon - Quantities could be randomized as well as existence.
Related Impacts Alliances investing in outposts (30bn isk) are often placed for optimal logistics to/from moon minerals as much as asteroid fields and COSMOS. To randomise minerals would reduce the value of investment in outpost construction redundant.
Idea: Variable supply/ration/efficiency in moons To take the comparison with Ore minerals vs. Moon minerals, an alternative could be to enable all moons to have some ratio of a particular mineral, much the same way that roids have a ratio of minerals.
Then each moon would not only have mineral types, but a specific extraction ratio or efficiency. What was chosen to mine is determined by the efficiency. If Dysprosium becomes excessively expensive on the market, maybe it is still worth extracting it from a moon with 0.25 efficiency ratio for Dysprosium.
|
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 18:00:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Thanks Serenity - yep I missed that one. Good to link the issues.
A more clear explanation you gave here anyway
|
Tiger Delivery
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 18:25:00 -
[7]
How can the data be randomized without a dev revealing where the next good moons will be to his corporation, like it has happened with many things in the past?
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 18:30:00 -
[8]
I definitely agree with the overall premise of the OP. "Static" (almost) anything in an MMO is bad. It should be part of MMO Design 101 to avoid that at all costs. Essentially it leads to camping which I have never seen be a good thing in a multiplayer game.
I'd like to offer an alternative as well. Not because I think it is necessarily a better model but as food for discussion. I haven't thought through all the implications of either way and this is the place to do just that.
The one problem I see with the OP is we are still left with a fixed amount of resources and as such things like a Dysprosium moon will still be hugely valuable and an Atmospheric Gas moon near worthless. You are just moving it about some so no one group gets an easy monopoly. Also, a fixed amount of moon mins means the system is not responsive or flexible to growth within EVE. When there were only an average of 20,000 players online they need less minerals than when the average doubled to 40,000. If you have the same fixed supply prices ramp up accordingly.
So, as an alternative how about every moon has every moon mineral available (bear with me before flipping out)? Different moons will have different amounts available of each resource. So, as an example, a moon that currently provides 100 Atmospheric Gas/hour could also provide 0.1 Dysprosium/hour. The Moon Miner must choose one or the other. On the flip side what today would be a Dysprosium moon may provide 100 Dysprosium/hour or 2 Evaporate Deposits/hour.
In this fashion you allow for flexible production of resources. Ordinarily moon mining the Dysp on a moon that generates 1/hour would not be economically viable and better to go with the abundant resource. But if prices go crazy like they are for Dysp then other moon miners may find it profitable to go after the more scarce resource.
This would also likely raise the price on some of the low ends some as people stop mining gases and start mining dysp.
I should note different moons would have all sorts of varying amounts of this or that. Nothing hard and fast so one moon might give 100 Dysp/hour while another might do 50/hour and another might do 10/hour and another 0.1/hour. Have things all over the board and of course the "good" moons would largely remain in 0.0 and be suitably rare.
Opinions?
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Hermia
Steel Daggers Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 18:34:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Tiger Delivery How can the data be randomized without a dev revealing where the next good moons will be to his corporation, like it has happened with many things in the past?
We cant go through life expecting corruption.
This idea is definealy worth exploring
|
Joe Starbreaker
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 19:00:00 -
[10]
I like that there are strategic resources in EVE and that alliances and corporations can know where they are and fight over them.
I do agree that the earnings are way out of whack, but I don't think the solution is to make minerals move around randomly. Instead, maybe the devs should just seed more Dysprosium moons to cause the price to fall.
EVE is a big place and it should be possible for a small alliance (200-300 people) to stake out a little industrial foothold of its own. The small number of Dysprosium moons, coupled with the importance of that mineral, means that large alliances can, and should, monopolize them.
---------------- [insert signature here] |
|
Joe Starbreaker
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 19:05:00 -
[11]
To clarify, I don't have anything against large alliances. Nevertheless, a game like EVE should favor the underdog at least a little, or things will get stagnant and suck. Dysprosium moons and Cosmos Radar complexes that can be farmed for billions weekly are a problem because they provide an absurd amount of low-effort income to help the "rich get richer".
There should be more opportunities for up-and-coming powers to get resources. Those resources shouldn't be as valuable as the ones that the big powers own (otherwise big powers wouldn't have any reward for holding territory) but the difference shouldn't be a factor of 100 or 1000!
---------------- [insert signature here] |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 19:10:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Instead, maybe the devs should just seed more Dysprosium moons to cause the price to fall.
To my mind that is a very poor way to go about things. Essentially you are having CCP decide where Dysp prices should be and manually fiddling with supply to moderate prices.
Managed economies = bad. Didn't work well for communist/socialist governments and no reason to suspect it'd make sense here.
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 19:25:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Tiger Delivery How can the data be randomized without a dev revealing where the next good moons will be to his corporation, like it has happened with many things in the past?
Randomly determined by a computer, not "randomly" determined by a dev. The dev can save them some moon probes, but that's it.
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h I definitely agree with the overall premise of the OP. "Static" (almost) anything in an MMO is bad. It should be part of MMO Design 101 to avoid that at all costs. Essentially it leads to camping which I have never seen be a good thing in a multiplayer game.
I'd like to offer an alternative as well. Not because I think it is necessarily a better model but as food for discussion. I haven't thought through all the implications of either way and this is the place to do just that.
The one problem I see with the OP is we are still left with a fixed amount of resources and as such things like a Dysprosium moon will still be hugely valuable and an Atmospheric Gas moon near worthless. You are just moving it about some so no one group gets an easy monopoly. Also, a fixed amount of moon mins means the system is not responsive or flexible to growth within EVE. When there were only an average of 20,000 players online they need less minerals than when the average doubled to 40,000. If you have the same fixed supply prices ramp up accordingly.
So, as an alternative how about every moon has every moon mineral available (bear with me before flipping out)? Different moons will have different amounts available of each resource. So, as an example, a moon that currently provides 100 Atmospheric Gas/hour could also provide 0.1 Dysprosium/hour. The Moon Miner must choose one or the other. On the flip side what today would be a Dysprosium moon may provide 100 Dysprosium/hour or 2 Evaporate Deposits/hour.
In this fashion you allow for flexible production of resources. Ordinarily moon mining the Dysp on a moon that generates 1/hour would not be economically viable and better to go with the abundant resource. But if prices go crazy like they are for Dysp then other moon miners may find it profitable to go after the more scarce resource.
This would also likely raise the price on some of the low ends some as people stop mining gases and start mining dysp.
I should note different moons would have all sorts of varying amounts of this or that. Nothing hard and fast so one moon might give 100 Dysp/hour while another might do 50/hour and another might do 10/hour and another 0.1/hour. Have things all over the board and of course the "good" moons would largely remain in 0.0 and be suitably rare.
Opinions?
It needs to be a bit less touchy than that, but I like the principle. If you want to avoid stasis directly, have the supplies on each moon increase while not mined and decrease while mined(and a Dysprosium-heavy moon will gain back Dysprosium faster, say). Of course, if you do that it'll push everything a lot closer to equality than it is now, but it'd be an automated way of decreasing stasis while not screwing over people who have been fighting for Dysprosium too heavily. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Joe Starbreaker
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 20:10:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Instead, maybe the devs should just seed more Dysprosium moons to cause the price to fall.
To my mind that is a very poor way to go about things. Essentially you are having CCP decide where Dysp prices should be and manually fiddling with supply to moderate prices.
Managed economies = bad. Didn't work well for communist/socialist governments and no reason to suspect it'd make sense here.
My problem with Dysprosium moons and the cosmos radar sites isn't quantitative, it's qualitative. If they were a little bit rarer and a little bit more profitable, they'd be fine. Just as kernite gives people a reason to go to lowsec, and crokite creates an incentive to hold sovereignty in some 0.0, so the most valuable moons should reward people for fighting for them. The problem is they're so special that a few wealthy powers are able to monopolize them and milk them for ridiculous amounts. They're a class of game content that isn't really available to everyone.
EVE should have bad moons, fair moons, good moons, and great moons. People would be rewarded for defending the great moons, but others whose moons are merely "good" would have a chance of one day dislodging the established powers. EVE shouldn't have bad, poor, fair, okay, and super-awesome-unbelievable-instawealth-iskfountain moons.
---------------- [insert signature here] |
Czanthria
Ad Astra Vexillum
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 00:15:00 -
[15]
I think that something should be done about moon materials, etc. but not this proposal.
I don't think there is a problem with various 0.0 regions being more valuable (permanently) than others. The high value areas are where the big boys play and the low value areas are where people start out. Similar to the progression from high sec to low sec to 0.0 in general. The issue I see is that the rarity of a moon material isn't a good gauge of it's value because of the reactions and uses of that material.
Dysprosium, Promethium, Neodymium and Thulium are all of the same rarity and one would expect that they would be of the same approximate value, much like low sec ores are similar in price but not exactly the same. Currently, Dysprosium is twice as expensive as Promethium and almost 50 times as expensive as Thulium. This is because Thulium is only used in producing 1 (per race) T2 component (which is only used in ships) whereas Dysprosium is used in producing 5 (per race) T2 components.
I believe CCP should look into balancing the uses of the various materials such that their price is more reflective of their rarity rather than simply which things they produce and which other materials they must combine with to produce them.
The rarity system for moon materials is completely broken and making moons move around won't fix that.
And btw, make abundance of moon materials useful in some way... -- Knowledge is Power! |
Thorradin
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 00:48:00 -
[16]
In short, no, I disagree Jade, you've got a good thought, but perhaps a better idea would be this:
All moons are given a greatly increased number of materials that can be mined, however this can vary from 2 (meaning double what you get now, if you use a T2 harvester if/when they are released), to 0.1, which would give a 10% yield.
You would have alot more moons bearing rarer minerals, but in smaller amounts, and to prevent moon mining from being complete overkill, you would have a limit on the number of moon harvesters that could be present, or you would start getting severely diminished returns (on all harvester) if you have more than 2, maybe 3, at the moon.
For example:
Star Fraction POS #12 is currently at a moon with 2 atmospheric gases, and 1 platinum, harvesting both. My change comes into being, now your moon also has 0.8 cobalt, 0.5 technetium, and 0.3 dysposium.
You stop harvesting the gases, and begin harvesting the dysposium, but you only get 30% as much, due to a 0.3 content in the moon. You then decide to gather technetium as well, however the 3rd harvester causes a reduced income of each harvester total (stacking penalty) and you receive 10% less from each harvester (now getting only 27% the dysp).
IMO, that would be better, as even the 'crappy' moons would have some value, and if people flood the market with valuable materials like dysp, they'll find themselves possibly changing their mining setup to collect something else for better profit.
|
Jeirth
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 13:24:00 -
[17]
Got my support, I'd like to see Eve continually changing, static resource placement doesn't support that.
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 13:31:00 -
[18]
Yeah I'm aware my proposal is a bit rough chaps. I'd definitely like to see more ideas coming on the issue and if somebody does come up with a killer proposal that does what we want to see here then I'll be very happy to support it.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Jeirth
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 14:00:00 -
[19]
Weird idea, remove pos. Give us moon mining ships, that have pos size shields when in deployed state, put sov on a different system, randomise the amount of resource in a moon, when a resource is depleted it respawns in another random moon within the region (or somewhere in eve for that matter). Also give us research ships and manufacturing ships, all of which require some fuel in order to do their jobs in deployed state. The isk sink generated by having to continually rescan to find the good moons helps the economy by removing some of the isk flow. Static defences become useless, alliances and corps have to move around as the resources move, or else accept they dont have a guaranteed income from the moons in their area, thus promoting roving gangs and patrols and allowing for ninja moon mining. Titans could become mobile stations, given a deployed state. PvP increases as the migrating corps/Alliances rub up against each other in pursuit of resources that move around. Exploration characters get more employment, scanning a systems moons on contract, or selling the results of a system scan.
|
Nariana Verex
Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 14:17:00 -
[20]
This would become more of a hassle than anything, and I think randomizing would lead to -more- moon mining and the collapse of all prices. Think about it.
If a corporation wants to have a better chance of finding Dysprosium in their systems, they simply have to mine every moon. Which over-saturates the market and causes prices on non-rare moon materials to plunge even further than they are now, as every moon mining company has an extreme surplus.
The erosion of deposits of materials on moons is not the answer, I believe. I think the answer is partially going to be making the lower end materials more valuable by increasing how many products that can be made with them [Make NPC trade goods buildable, woooo] or decreasing the amount per cycle rare materials can be extracted by. Much like how you can get thousands of tritanium from a single cycle, but only a few dozen Megacyte in the same span of time.
Sorry Jade, not signed.
Do the right thing. Don't leave shuttles in space. |
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 14:19:00 -
[21]
I offer this as an idea for lessening the impact of static moon mining and add my general support to this issue. -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
|
Nick Bison
Gallente Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Intrepid Proprietary Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 00:29:00 -
[22]
I believe that any overhaul of moon-mining "must" include opening up moon mining in 0.5 and 0.6 - as I understand this was a feature of the game a few years back but was removed as part of the (now failed) program to force people into 0.0 space.
With Dyspo (and the other top 3) moons netting the Uber-Allainces billions of ISK a month per moon, where is the major harm in allowing the small research corps using the crappy moon-materials in HiSec to help offset the cost of their POS's?
|
J Kunjeh
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 01:36:00 -
[23]
100% supported! I think instead of respawning, a terraforming element could be introduced where if you had the skills you could "re-seed" the moon with X chance of certain mineral veins being recreated. Now, I don't know much about terraforming, so I might just be talking out my behind, but it was a thought that popped into my head as I read the OP.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 02:01:00 -
[24]
long thread is long
_
THE APPRENTICE || mineral balance || nanofix
|
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 02:14:00 -
[25]
I like the general idea of making it randomized, but it is pretty rough, and serenity has some good points. Also, open up moon mining in .4 at least (currently it is .3 or below, right?). While it needs some serious refinement and consideration, it gets my support.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 03:22:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 13/08/2008 03:22:42 To minimize the macroeconomic disruption caused by any change like this, the total number of high-value moons should increase to compensate for the "flux time" after a high-value moon has vanished and before it has been rediscovered and mined.
If this is not done, then the quantity of high-value moon minerals on the market will decrease in proportion to the ratio of the average length of time that it takes to relocate a high-value moon to the duration of the high-value moon.
Don't try to spin this suggestion as "Wah don't take away my moon-mining profits." The income from high-value moons is determined entirely by market demand right now. The demand remains the same (or grows) regardless of what the supply does, so the average of miner's profits won't be affected.
As an aside, this would work out great for GS. GS holds sooo much worthless space. If the distribution of high-value moons becomes more even across space over time, it can't help but improve our space over the long run.
|
Kahega Amielden
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 03:31:00 -
[27]
Good ideas. Also, +1 for CSM activity in the forum.
|
Xtreem
Knockaround Guys Inc. Exxxotic
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 03:38:00 -
[28]
a good idea, but it would rise the price in T2 modules/ships as the moons would assumably need to be rescanned, re setup on each move, perhaps the person who has the moon originally gets a heads up to its new location in an attempt to resecure if possible.
also the cost of scan probes would rocket, even thought i own 3 med-high moons, i like this idea
|
Gabriel Darkefyre
Crystal Ship
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 12:00:00 -
[29]
Not a bad Idea, though there would be several kinks that need to be worked on.
For those saying that It would lead to less conflict, I disagree. Once you set up a Moon Mining POS you're enemies are not going to want to let you have the income from that, even if they can't hold the moon themselves. So, Fast Raiding Parties hitting the Moon Miners to disrupt operations are always going to be a threat.
Likewise, say Alliance A and Alliance B both manage to locate the same new deposit just inside Alliance C's Territory. Suddenly Alliance C's Territory becomes a battleground with 3 Alliances fighting it out for control of the New Resources all trying to push the other two Alliances back far enough to be able to set up their own Mining POS and Defend it.
As a result, the limits of Alliance control become a lot more Fluid with the borders shifting almost daily across the map.
|
Junkie Beverage
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 13:07:00 -
[30]
before they even consider this they need to make both moon scanning and pos setup/teardown less pointlessly soul destroying
|
|
Yorda
Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 13:24:00 -
[31]
Jade, maybe you should just propose that CCP give you some 0.0 space and a bunch of money. Not really much point in trying to hide it with :words:
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 13:28:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Jeirth Got my support, I'd like to see Eve continually changing, static resource placement doesn't support that.
There has to be some static resources to differentiate one system from another. Vote against the nano nerf! |
Chodie101
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 14:21:00 -
[33]
I'd love to see the RP explanation for a moon, formed over millennia, suddenly having a geological miracle occur and it's entire mineral composition changing at random!
I personally prefer the idea of moons remaining static because it better reflects the real world that we can all relate to - For example look at all those lucky Arabs in Saudi who have all the oil! (Dysprosium) whilst us poor sods in the UK only have coal! (Atmospheric Gases).
It's a fact of life that some regions of Earth are richer in resources that are high in value than others and (no matter how much we wish for it) oil fields are not going to randomly up sticks and appear under a different country - I don't see why Eve's resource distribution should be any different.
However, that said - there is something that can realistically shift and change, which is technological advancement - in the same way we are looking to achieve the same ends oil does for us with other things (biofuels etc) how about some kind of RP technological advancement which enables us to make synthetic dysprosium by mining chains of other materials?
This could be set up with a similar idea to invention and t2 bpo, where a dyspro moon-holder still has the best moon (like a t2 bpo holder still has the best resource) as he gets dyspro directly from his moon, but other players can make synthetic dysprosium with a larger time / pos network investment and correspondingly smaller profit margin in exactly the same way you can build t2 gear but with more work and smaller profit than the bpo owner does.
I'm not necessarily proposing that as an idea (and I don't even know if I'd support it if someone else did!) but it would seem more realistic than minerals magically jumping off of one moon, flying across space and landing on another one....
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 14:42:00 -
[34]
Permanent Main Deposits + Depleting Random Minor Deposits = Stability without Stagnation
I have already posted a way to achieve this, link further up this thread.
-------- Ideas for: Mining
|
Gabriel Darkefyre
Minmatar Crystal Ship
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 15:16:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Gabriel Darkefyre on 13/08/2008 15:25:08
Originally by: Chodie101 I'd love to see the RP explanation for a moon, formed over millennia, suddenly having a geological miracle occur and it's entire mineral composition changing at random!
I personally prefer the idea of moons remaining static because it better reflects the real world that we can all relate to - For example look at all those lucky Arabs in Saudi who have all the oil! (Dysprosium) whilst us poor sods in the UK only have coal! (Atmospheric Gases).
It's a fact of life that some regions of Earth are richer in resources that are high in value than others and (no matter how much we wish for it) oil fields are not going to randomly up sticks and appear under a different country - I don't see why Eve's resource distribution should be any different.
Actually, the situation in the real world is closer to that analogy than you think. While Old Fields get depleted, new ones are being constantly located. At the moment, the primary barriers to extracting all the discovered Oil Reserves is Politics and Technology with most of the discovered reserves being in Remote Areas with unique problems associated with their extraction.
For example, Britain has extracted a good amount of the oil from the North Sea over the Last 40 Years, there is still a huge amount in the ground still to be extracted however, a large proportion of that oil is simply too difficult or uneconomical to extract with the old Big Oil Company Business Models. It's why smaller companies are making a killing at the moment with the Fields that the likes of Shell and BP won't touch. Likewise, a lot of oil is now being located on the West Side of Scotland in the Atlantic Ocean requiring innovations in Deep Water Rigs.
So it's less a case of the deposits magically moving and more a case of old deposits drying up and new deposits being discovered, often in areas that the old survey equipment either couldn't reach, couldn't process or simply missed.
This is compounded in EVE by the simple fact that each Moon Survey is completed within 10 Minutes, Deposits being missed would therefore be easy to explain as errors in the original scans (Which only pick up the Most Obvious Results in the scanned area)
Conversely, as an idea you could come up with a structure that you could anchor (Survey Sattelites?) once you had your Moon Mining POS up and running that would continually scan for fresh deposits on that moon thus prolonging the Lifespan of the materials you're mining.
|
Grim Mercy
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 15:32:00 -
[36]
Those that have the really good moons have already won the race, so to speak.
They had to fight for them, and now reap the rewards of milking them. The problem with this model is that any new-comer alliance that wishes to challenge them needs those same moons in order to be able to keep up with a long campaign of attrition. As long as old, established alliances have isk-fountains at their disposal, they will only truly be challenged by other, old, establish alliances.
By setting up the moons in the way they did, CCP basically created player run factions, not alliances. In order to challenge the old guard, one needs the resources to match.
Make every moon mineral available in every moon in the game, either in the same amounts, or do some sort of breakdown with 50% of the moons containing the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th rarest mins, and the other 50% containing the 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th rarest mins... however you do it, break the monopoly.
Under this system, alliances will still have incentive to conquer more space, because that will mean more moons in total, but the bigger (and ungainly) they get, the harder their logistics become, so some alliances may want to pare down some of their space. This makes it necessary to balance expansion with sustainment, and the same group of 500 guys doesn't own one quarter of conquerable space anymore.
Think about it: If you have a small, lean, well-trusted, everybody-knows-everybody-in-real-life alliance, they will be able to take more space then an equal sized alliance that may not know each other. Similarly, huge allinaces containing thousands of people will have to strive to make sure they can trust their pos managers if they want to hold on to all of their space.
After a few months of this level of ass-pain required to hold massive chunks of space, it will be interesting to see who still does. I think it is totally realistic that some of the old guard will still prosper under this system, hell some might even benefit from the new system, but the old, huge, lazy alliances will surely crumble if they can't step up to the new challanges of maintaining their space.
Who's with me? |
Aero089
Exiled. Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 15:44:00 -
[37]
Cutting my own fingers by supporting this but hey. Didn't like static plexes, don't like static moons. Maybe it's worth training Astrometrics V for this :) ---
|
teji
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:16:00 -
[38]
Edited by: teji on 13/08/2008 16:19:42 Oh god this is dumb. Stop making proposals on 0.0 which you obviously have no idea about.
How about this
Let's have agents that you have improved your standings with just up and vanish. Let's have BPO's just randomly vanish from your hangar and show up in my hangar.
there is no :facepalm: big enough for this idea.
|
Grim Mercy
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:23:00 -
[39]
Originally by: teji Edited by: teji on 13/08/2008 16:19:42 Oh god this is dumb. Stop making proposals on 0.0 which you obviously have no idea about.
How about this
Let's have agents that you have improved your standings with just up and vanish. Let's have BPO's just randomly vanish from your hangar and show up in my hangar.
there is no :facepalm: big enough for this idea.
And the old guard weighs in...
Interesting.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:31:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Grim Mercy Edited by: Grim Mercy on 13/08/2008 15:41:22 Those that have the really good moons have already won the race, so to speak.
They had to fight for them, and now reap the rewards of milking them. The problem with this model is that any new-comer alliance that wishes to challenge them needs those same moons in order to be able to keep up with a long campaign of attrition. As long as old, established alliances have isk-fountains at their disposal, they will only truly be challenged by other, old, establish alliances.
By setting up the moons in the way they did, CCP basically created player run factions, not alliances. In order to challenge the old guard, one needs the resources to match.
Make every moon mineral available in every moon in the game, either in the same amounts, or do some sort of breakdown with 50% of the moons containing the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th rarest mins, and the other 50% containing the 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th rarest mins... however you do it, break the monopoly.
Under this system, alliances will still have incentive to conquer more space, because that will mean more moons in total, but the bigger (and ungainly) they get, the harder their logistics become, so some alliances may want to pare down some of their space. This makes it necessary to balance expansion with sustainment, and the same group of 500 guys doesn't own one quarter of conquerable space anymore.
Think about it: If you have a small, lean, well-trusted, everybody-knows-everybody-in-real-life alliance, they will be able to take more space then an equal sized alliance that may not know each other. Similarly, huge allinaces containing thousands of people will have to strive to make sure they can trust their pos managers if they want to hold on to all of their space.
After a few months of this level of ass-pain required to hold massive chunks of space, it will be interesting to see who still does. I think it is totally realistic that some of the old guard will still prosper under this system, hell some might even benefit from the new system, but the old, huge, lazy alliances will surely crumble if they can't step up to the new challanges of maintaining their space.
Who's with me?
Edit: About the break down of minerals in the "every-mineral moons"... have like 25k units of the most comming/least expensive min per 500 units of the middle minerals per 1 unit of the rare minerals, or something like that. Not those numbers exactly, but along those lines.
Aw, it looks like somebody is mad as hell over the T2 BPO thread that Toman made.
It looks like somebody is terribly, terribly afraid of losing their cash cow.
|
|
Grim Mercy
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:34:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Toman Jerich
Aw, it looks like somebody is mad as hell over the T2 BPO thread that Toman made.
It looks like somebody is terribly, terribly afraid of losing their cash cow.
Which came first, my reply in this thread, or the whine thread about the BPOs?
Goonswarm: Forum-warrioring at it's finest.
|
teji
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:40:00 -
[42]
Make no mistake. Static moon mining is one of the FEW things that encourages combat in 0.0 at this point. Arguing anything else is delusional.
|
Grim Mercy
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:44:00 -
[43]
What about some sort of system that encourages maintenance of conquered space? It would make 0.0 more of a "new frontier" where new entities could compete, rather than "Join BoB, Goons, RA, or NC."
No doubt the 0.0 power blocs would absolutely hate this idea, as it would burden them with having to work to keep what they have. But how many people (people, not characters) are actively in 0.0? And how many of all of those "high-sec, carebare, low-risk high-reward, carebear pussies" would go to 0.0 if it didn't mean having to join an old, established alliance (who, by the grace of time alone, got there first).
|
SencneS
Amarr Rebellion Against big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:50:00 -
[44]
I think the main reason why CCP hasn't made Moon mining dynamic is because they know all too well that you'll end up with MORE POSES.
Think about it for a second. The most logical way to overcome dynamic moons would be to have a large POS or two running the reactions and small moons mining the moon minerals at the dynamic moons. No one is going to unanchor a large POS with all the the fixings to move to a new moon. They are all going to have a central place to operate. The fact Jump Freighters make it easier now to move minerals from POS to POS. So logistics like issues are kind of a non-issue now.
This would lead to people not bothering with the 60 minutes unanchor time to recover a small amount of assets, Small POS, Moon Miner, Silo. People would probably leave the POS up anyway in case something good came along on that moon. People would have to attack and kill the old powerless POS before they deploy their own.
The way CCP would combat this would be to make POS unanchor times a lot faster, because you KNOW they don't want thousands of SMALL POSES all over the place.
This would in turn break 0.0 warfare. The ability to quickly move a POS makes it easier to defend locations..
Although I'd support something to make Moon Mining not a static as it is, I don't think dynamic or depleted resource are the solution.
Amarr for Life |
teji
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:53:00 -
[45]
Edited by: teji on 13/08/2008 16:54:01
Originally by: Grim Mercy What about some sort of system that encourages maintenance of conquered space? It would make 0.0 more of a "new frontier" where new entities could compete, rather than "Join BoB, Goons, RA, or NC."
The reasons that new entities normally don't show up in 0.0 is that the majority of space in 0.0 is absolutely terrible and the small amount of good stuff is already defended.
|
Jemaia
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:54:00 -
[46]
Not supported
1.) Moving PoSes is inhumane treatment of logistics personnel as it stands, having to move EVERY moon mining pos once every 3 months on top of the logistics nightmare is asking for people to simply quit the game outright.
2.) As has been pointed out on the parody threads there are other forms of static income.
3.) You being the one to propose such things is akin to a person claiming all people with blue eyes and brown hair (0.0 population) should be locked in a cage (PoS setups) and poked with sticks for your amusement, it's a sick sadistic sort of entertainment you probably come up with while sitting at home when you aren't role playing a lady of the night for some well hung caldari stud.
4.) Over 2/3rds of your post is posturing with a sort of assumed setup for ad hominem towards anyone that would disagree. "Would CCP be prepared to shake up politics and over-stabilized borders in 0.0" anyone who doesn't support your form of torture is automatically assumed to be for over stabilized borders and not necessarily against your half witted ideas on things you yourself will never have to experience. It's akin to the whole abortion issue one side identifies as Pro-choice and the other Pro-life as if either is truly against freedom in choice or life itself.
This sort of writing should be an automatic put off, if your argument cannot stand on it's own 2 feet without such posturing it deserves to die a cold death. If it stands only because people are too moronic to see through such posturing then it is deception.
Sometimes I wonder who really wants to destroy this game, Jade Constantine or GOONS, you seem to be the most intent on destruction thus far.
|
Grim Mercy
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 16:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: teji
Originally by: Grim Mercy What about some sort of system that encourages maintenance of conquered space? It would make 0.0 more of a "new frontier" where new entities could compete, rather than "Join BoB, Goons, RA, or NC."
The reasons that new entities normally don't show up in 0.0 is that the majority of space in 0.0 is absolutely terrible.
...absolutely terrible because the few good moons that make it worth while are well defended.
Even though the proposal Jade put forth has a ton of problems on it's own, it still addresses the fact that there is a huge imbalance between "Those that Have" and "Those that Want" and there is little recourse for anyone other than another huge 0.0 power bloc to do anything about it. It's basically class war; the aristocracy controls the wealth, and the peasants revolt. I think Jade is just trying to come up with some way to make it possible to redistribute the wealth (although, his idea does suggest some sort of random reassigning, rather than a way to make it so those not in power bloc may be able to even think about contesting for it).
|
Innominate
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:04:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Jade Constantine I hate successful 0.0 alliances. My T2 production business should be made more profitable. If you're not grandfathered into the T2 production business with BPOs you have no right to possess a long term source of income.
|
Aprudena Gist
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:16:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Grim Mercy
Originally by: Toman Jerich
Aw, it looks like somebody is mad as hell over the T2 BPO thread that Toman made.
It looks like somebody is terribly, terribly afraid of losing their cash cow.
Which came first, my reply in this thread, or the whine thread about the BPOs?
Goonswarm: Forum-warrioring at it's finest.
Yes and this thread and everything associdated with Jade Constainte isn't ****ing stupid enough with this joke of the CSM called the Jade Constinte Power Hour.
|
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:23:00 -
[50]
Jade, stick to "Hardcore mode" proposals. |
|
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:39:00 -
[51]
Dumb idea, Jade. Alliances did the work, they make the effort, they control the space. Many of the locations of these moons are well known, so get your fleet of puppets to try and take them over.
Moons are what they are, and I find it hard to consider any of them one day, magically, changing into another. I'm all for expanding the supply of rare moons, but leave that to the devs and when they decide to expand Eve... it constantly has been expanding, so when new systems come out... new moons too.
--------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man. |
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:43:00 -
[52]
Jade, I went and checked the Features and Ideas Discussion forum, and I find no thread with many supporting replies. Is there a reason why this Feature and Idea wasn't posted there first to get feedback from the general EvE populace? |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 17:47:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Hertford Jade, I went and checked the Features and Ideas Discussion forum, and I find no thread with many supporting replies. Is there a reason why this Feature and Idea wasn't posted there first to get feedback from the general EvE populace?
LOL! Since when do people check with the Features and Ideas forum before posting their stuff in the Assembly Hall?
-------- Ideas for: Mining
|
misplaced archaeology
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 18:05:00 -
[54]
Not supported.
Originally by: Jemaia Not supported
1.) Moving PoSes is inhumane treatment of logistics personnel as it stands, having to move EVERY moon mining pos once every 3 months on top of the logistics nightmare is asking for people to simply quit the game outright.
This
Quote: 2.) As has been pointed out on the parody threads there are other forms of static income.
Yes
Quote: 3.) You being the one to propose such things is akin to a person claiming all people with blue eyes and brown hair (0.0 population) should be locked in a cage (PoS setups) and poked with sticks for your amusement, it's a sick sadistic sort of entertainment you probably come up with while sitting at home when you aren't role playing a lady of the night for some well hung caldari stud.
What
Quote: 4.) Over 2/3rds of your post is posturing with a sort of assumed setup for ad hominem towards anyone that would disagree. "Would CCP be prepared to shake up politics and over-stabilized borders in 0.0" anyone who doesn't support your form of torture is automatically assumed to be for over stabilized borders and not necessarily against your half witted ideas on things you yourself will never have to experience. It's akin to the whole abortion issue one side identifies as Pro-choice and the other Pro-life as if either is truly against freedom in choice or life itself.
I hate freedom. (there how goony is that? goony goons goon gooned)
Quote: This sort of writing should be an automatic put off, if your argument cannot stand on it's own 2 feet without such posturing it deserves to die a cold death. If it stands only because people are too moronic to see through such posturing then it is deception.
Sometimes I wonder who really wants to destroy this game, Jade Constantine or GOONS, you seem to be the most intent on destruction thus far.
Hm.
Originally by: Innominate
Originally by: Jade Constantine I hate successful 0.0 alliances. My T2 production business should be made more profitable. If you're not grandfathered into the T2 production business with BPOs you have no right to possess a long term source of income.
This edit seems a little extreme, but sadly it also looks accurate.
It used to be complexes, now it's Dyspro. T2 BPOs are a bit less profitable due to invention, but they're still quite the isk printing machine... and it still would be if this change were put in. They might even improve.
Grim Mercy: One of the things about t2 bpos is that there's even more of a 'huge imbalance between "Those that Have" and "Those that Want" and there is little recourse for anyone other than another huge 0.0 power bloc to do anything about it' except that not even a 'huge 0.0 power bloc' can do anything about it. The t2 BPOs belong to those that got into the game early. End of story, unless they actually want to get rid of them.
I wouldn't have any problem with increasing the viability of mining lowends and/or decreasing just how much the Dyspro isk fountains are worth, but it seems like the Jade's proposal is an attempt to nerf someone else's alliance level income while keeping his own intact.
|
Karentaki
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 19:45:00 -
[55]
I actually support this - currently moon mining is too static, and rich, powerful alliances will always be rich and powerful due to the moons they control, except in rare circumstances such as internal disputes, or overwhelming offensice action. ============= RE: The suicide nerf
Originally by: agent apple I believe I can safely speak for many of us when I say,
Dear Devs, Go Back to WOW
|
McDonALTs
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 20:21:00 -
[56]
Edited by: McDonALTs on 13/08/2008 20:23:42 Sorry, dont buy this.
Random moons means people will bunker because eventually they will get a pimp moon. This discorages pvp and invasions.
However the current system is broken in creating pos wars which are the most hated part of eve.
Solution?
Exploration. Have miners able to gather these stuff from exploration belts or from mining planets or suns directly. Get rid of Station NPC style income. Promote active resource generation in risky space so pvpers can send small raiding gangs to hunt insted of superblobs to fight pos's uner 20 titans doomsdaying under cynojammer crap.
E.G
Now - POS goes up. Zero encoragement for raiders/small pvpers. Only superblobers attack POS's for their isk. Static resources = broken gameplay
What should happen - perhaps people take out exhumer lvl5 ships or whatever to mine(or gas collect) 0.0 suns. This is very risky since any pvper can enter system and warp to sun to guarentee a fight. Perhaps the miners get a mixture of 0.0 minerals such as dyso and prom (to keep RP fans happy, condensation for gas collectors)
Either way - Make Moons mining no longer AFK NPC isk printer that requiers a superblob affair to remove by pomoting the poor eve member to mine suns/planets to econimically compete with Mining towers. This promotes the poor eve member and helps him make the riches that previously only CEO's who kept the moon isk had, but also it promotes the solo pvper again and the small raiding gang!
What do you think?
|
Danyael Tyren
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 20:30:00 -
[57]
Guys, I have a huge pile T2 BPO's lying here, and invention kind of moved my profits from Monster HUGE, to just HUGE. How can I move it back up?
Hey, let's make getting the materials for T2 ships even more difficult and expensive, and even more of a logistical nightmare than it is currently. I don't really know anything about 0.0 or how moon mining works, but if we make the mats randomly disappear and pop up elsehwere, that will slow down things enough we will be able to cash in!
Now, I just need more :words: ... ------ NAPs (nap means we wonÆt kill you today, maybe, but thatÆs all that means unless you help and contribute to coalition or being useful to us there is no obligation for us to keep that +standing |
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 23:06:00 -
[58]
Aye!
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
HCIChicken
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 00:18:00 -
[59]
I wouldn't support this idea even if ccp made it quicker to setup and tear down poses, as well as scan moons. Currently there are about 2-4k moons in a region, and I recently scanned over 1300 of them in one of our regions. This took over 40 hours of nonstop scanning.
This idea is horrible and you should stop posting.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 00:27:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Jeirth Got my support, I'd like to see Eve continually changing, static resource placement doesn't support that.
There has to be some static resources to differentiate one system from another.
There are, location and number of moons.
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 03:20:00 -
[61]
NO --
|
Alexi Kalashnikov
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 13:03:00 -
[62]
Yes, let's continue to punish 0.0 alliances for being successful at holding valuable regions and vast amounts of stations. Let's force them to preform tedious procedures in order to maintain themselves while the groups in empire do nothing but run level 4 missions in 1.0 security space with no risk.
This movement would also directly influence you Jade, as the reduced high end moon pool to draw from would result in inreased T2 costs and T2 margins. I don't appreciate your abuse of your position to further your wallet. Moon mining, as it stands, is fine: what needs to be addressed is the break-down and distribution of the resources requiring Moon materials. That says that instead of 1000 units of low ends and 500 of the high, you require 4000 of the low and 250 of the high, making the low more valuable and the high's less. This would be a far larger and more beneficial step for moon mining than any random distribution of moons which change from time to time.
Additionally, I would encourge that the high end moons be re-distributed. Right now well over half of EVEs high ends are contained within three regions: and that's just bloody ******ed (I speak, of course, of Paragon Soul, Feythabolis and Delve).
|
HenkieBoy
Enrave Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 13:33:00 -
[63]
Edited by: HenkieBoy on 14/08/2008 13:35:47 I would remove the mining from the moons and introduce asteroids that can be mined (not the roids found in belts btw). These asteroids are spawned random in EVE and need to be probed to be found.
The asteriod has a certain ammount of stuff that can be mined untill it is depleted and gone. The asteroid itself has also a timer (it's on the move for role playing sake ;) ) so if the timer is up the roid is gone also wether all materials are mined or not.
In order to mine the asteroid you have a special mining structure that can be launched once and is destroyed when the roid is gone. It is possible to get it back but it needs to be 'retrieved' while the roid is still there.
I really think that moons should be only used for sov and not for mining. One problem though, the system I thought of will not triger wars more often but it does trigger a need for space because holding more space means getting higher chance that a roid will spawn inside the alliance space.
|
SencneS
Amarr Rebellion Against big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 14:03:00 -
[64]
Maybe just Dynamic Moons within constellations? Like 8/10,9/10,10/10 Plexes.
Amarr for Life |
mynnna
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 14:10:00 -
[65]
I think you're just looking for more ways to screw over the 0.0 alliances that you can't actually bully around like you do empire corps. This is just along the same vein as your destructible outposts suggestions.
|
Ifusikae Uiohyu
Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 14:34:00 -
[66]
Originally by: HenkieBoy Edited by: HenkieBoy on 14/08/2008 13:35:47 I would remove the mining from the moons and introduce asteroids that can be mined (not the roids found in belts btw). These asteroids are spawned random in EVE and need to be probed to be found.
The asteriod has a certain ammount of stuff that can be mined untill it is depleted and gone. The asteroid itself has also a timer (it's on the move for role playing sake ;) ) so if the timer is up the roid is gone also wether all materials are mined or not.
In order to mine the asteroid you have a special mining structure that can be launched once and is destroyed when the roid is gone. It is possible to get it back but it needs to be 'retrieved' while the roid is still there.
I really think that moons should be only used for sov and not for mining. One problem though, the system I thought of will not triger wars more often but it does trigger a need for space because holding more space means getting higher chance that a roid will spawn inside the alliance space.
Bluntly speaking, there is not a single aspect of this suggestion that is not absolutely terrible. Sorry if it comes off as a troll, because it's not, but really, this is all just bad as bad can be when flying around in a mothership full of Groon fighters.
I think part of the problem is that much of the people here think that moon mining is some magical ISK fountain where profit flows like rivers of honey. Maybe one of the logistics people could give them an idea of the typical cost? Just a suggestion.
I'm all for redistribution of wealth, but to just randomly move the already spawned moons? This just shows how laughably unqualified you are, Jade, as a CSM and even more so as the head of such a group. If you want this to be taken even remotely seriously you should stop treating it like some... well, magical ISK fountain.
|
RDevz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 17:21:00 -
[67]
I love scanning moons. It's wonderful how it takes hours to find out what's in a system (usually nothing valuable), and to collate this and work out where you can make money without going insane from the logistics. Now I get to re-scan space, because Jade would have moons move around at random. Hooray!
Even more fun is anchoring POSes. Right click, anchor, wait 5 minutes, right click, online, wait 5 minutes, repeat for 40 modules. Now I get to spend EVEN MORE of my play time staring at a little bar counting down to 0. BRILLIANT. This is just what I wanted to do to help keep my alliance afloat. This is a wonderful, well-thought out idea, from a sensible and not-at-all biased CSM rep, who isn't acting in his own interest.
|
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 17:36:00 -
[68]
It's a pain in the ass to set up a POS. We already hate POS's.
Wait until after "Starbase Logistics is Needlessly Soul-Destroying" has been addressed before making moon minerals migrate around. |
Recluse Viramor
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 18:57:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Junkie Beverage before they even consider this they need to make both moon scanning and pos setup/teardown less pointlessly soul destroying
This,
With the current pos mechanics if moons functioned as Jade proposes the prices of moon minerals and the subsequent materials and components would sky rocket as the time spent finding moons and deploying mining operations would rise exponentially.
|
J Kunjeh
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 22:11:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Grim Mercy
Originally by: teji Edited by: teji on 13/08/2008 16:19:42 Oh god this is dumb. Stop making proposals on 0.0 which you obviously have no idea about.
How about this
Let's have agents that you have improved your standings with just up and vanish. Let's have BPO's just randomly vanish from your hangar and show up in my hangar.
there is no :facepalm: big enough for this idea.
And the old guard weighs in...
Interesting.
I propose letting Goonswarm have 100% influence over what gets done in 0.0, because they obviously are the only one's who know anything about it and all of you other carebears should just leave well enough alone!
|
|
Drake Draconis
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 23:34:00 -
[71]
Why not have moons run out of minerals and then eventually restock over time.
Much like a re-spawning asteroids.
Yeah I know.. random idea... but I'm curious as to the response.
Migrating moon minerals is a bit of a pain... especially from the programing aspect... the algorithms involved would blow your brains out. Let's not make CCP's job any harder ^_^;;
Better yet.... lower the rate at which you gain income from them..and cause the balance to shift more in favor of mining rocks/ice... that would help a bit.
I don't get why theres only "1" ore/type mined from any one moon/planet... why not have a combination of things and then be required to purchase specific modules of various qualities or require various skills to mine that specific type or types of ore.
There are various strengths of asteroids right? Why not have the same type.
A planet/moon in reality would not have a single quality of ore or ice but many kinds of various yields.
Random thought at best I know. Certainly better than migrating moons.... yuck.
|
Christari Zuborov
Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 00:03:00 -
[72]
I'll only support this if asteroid belts get the same treatment.
Mined the veldspar out of existance? Time to move on to another mining spot until it's regrown.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 00:05:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Recluse Viramor
Originally by: Junkie Beverage before they even consider this they need to make both moon scanning and pos setup/teardown less pointlessly soul destroying
This,
With the current pos mechanics if moons functioned as Jade proposes the prices of moon minerals and the subsequent materials and components would sky rocket as the time spent finding moons and deploying mining operations would rise exponentially.
Really or would that just be BoBs POS people and other current players on the POS scene? Knowing there's a chance to find a high end moon no-one knows about and possibly mine it for a while before the world comes crashing in would serve to bring many more corporations out to 0.0 trying their luck.
Right now there's a finite amount of valuable moons, people know where they are and know whether or not they have a chance in hell of taking them, most of them stay on the same few hands and as a result the prices skyrocket.
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Woodwraith
Prophets Of a Damned Universe
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 02:57:00 -
[74]
if you were to do this, youd have to add MORE rare moons, if its random distribution, how many good moons are going to wind up unfound, sitting in backwater systems that no one goes near, your not going to find more than 1 or 2 0.0 populations that will keep going out and scanning EVERY FRIGGIN MOON to see if something valuable has popped up, or theyll write a macro to do it, and general discussion will explode again.
|
StainLessStealRat
101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 03:16:00 -
[75]
I agree with the OP on all points. Give us smaller alliance's a chance to get some isk even in providance.untill we are booted from the moon that is. |
Xam Nesse
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 03:24:00 -
[76]
I do not support making moon minerals moving about in any random (or any other) manner. It just doesn't seem to make sense to me. However, that said, I doubt that CCP will ever hurt the Uber-Alliance "Isk Printers" but I will repeat myself and say that at a minimum, moon mining needs to be opened up all the way to 0.5 and 0.6 systems. Sure those moons are crappy but they will help out some of the small research corps.
Side note (perhaps a troll): the absolute vehement opposition to any moon mining changes by the Uber-Alliances really points to them as the true "carebears" who, once they place their POS, want to forever just rake in billions and billions of ISK for no effort.
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 03:37:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Xam Nesse I do not support making moon minerals moving about in any random (or any other) manner. It just doesn't seem to make sense to me. However, that said, I doubt that CCP will ever hurt the Uber-Alliance "Isk Printers" but I will repeat myself and say that at a minimum, moon mining needs to be opened up all the way to 0.5 and 0.6 systems. Sure those moons are crappy but they will help out some of the small research corps.
Side note (perhaps a troll): the absolute vehement opposition to any moon mining changes by the Uber-Alliances really points to them as the true "carebears" who, once they place their POS, want to forever just rake in billions and billions of ISK for no effort.
A moon mining POS, like any POS, still needs to be defended and it's not guaranteed that you have it forever. One cannot say there is no effort involved. An alliance that puts no effort into their moon mining loses their moons.
However, I do agree it is disheartening that practically all moons have been identified and will never change (under the current system, that is). But such is the nature of exploration. Once the features have been discovered, in this case the locations of valuable moons, there is nothing left to find.
|
Drolus
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 04:11:00 -
[78]
Stupid idea. Some things should be static so people can fight over them, that's what EVE is all about.
NOT SUPPORTED
|
HenkieBoy
Enrave Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 07:15:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Ifusikae Uiohyu
Originally by: HenkieBoy Edited by: HenkieBoy on 14/08/2008 13:35:47 I would remove the mining from the moons and introduce asteroids that can be mined (not the roids found in belts btw). These asteroids are spawned random in EVE and need to be probed to be found.
The asteriod has a certain ammount of stuff that can be mined untill it is depleted and gone. The asteroid itself has also a timer (it's on the move for role playing sake ;) ) so if the timer is up the roid is gone also wether all materials are mined or not.
In order to mine the asteroid you have a special mining structure that can be launched once and is destroyed when the roid is gone. It is possible to get it back but it needs to be 'retrieved' while the roid is still there.
I really think that moons should be only used for sov and not for mining. One problem though, the system I thought of will not triger wars more often but it does trigger a need for space because holding more space means getting higher chance that a roid will spawn inside the alliance space.
Bluntly speaking, there is not a single aspect of this suggestion that is not absolutely terrible. Sorry if it comes off as a troll, because it's not, but really, this is all just bad as bad can be when flying around in a mothership full of Groon fighters.
I think part of the problem is that much of the people here think that moon mining is some magical ISK fountain where profit flows like rivers of honey. Maybe one of the logistics people could give them an idea of the typical cost? Just a suggestion.
I'm all for redistribution of wealth, but to just randomly move the already spawned moons? This just shows how laughably unqualified you are, Jade, as a CSM and even more so as the head of such a group. If you want this to be taken even remotely seriously you should stop treating it like some... well, magical ISK fountain.
The idea I posted is just something that popped out of my head. It isn't about dividing the wealth because in RL the biggest countries hold the most resources and have the most money to spend, there is nothing wrong with that. In EVE things are ok as they are now. But I do think that moon mining and sov holding should be split up. Right now you got one structure, a POS at a moon, that does all tasks at once and that needs to be split up I think.
|
Xanja
2H Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 07:33:00 -
[80]
Originally by: HenkieBoy
It isn't about dividing the wealth because in RL the biggest countries hold the most resources and have the most money to spend, there is nothing wrong with that.
Yeah, those damn paupers from Switzerland, Monacco, Austria, Lichtenstein and the Vatican etc.etc. sure don't have two pennies to rub together. ----------------- |
|
Gabriel Darkefyre
Minmatar Crystal Ship
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 08:32:00 -
[81]
Well, I'm hearing a lot of dissent against this idea by Individual Members of Goonfleet. What I'd like to hear is what the two Goonfleet CSM's have to say on this issue as if this gets onto the CSM Agenda then their positions on the issue are what's going to matter. Likewise, the positions of the other members of the CSM on this issue.
Getting the arguements hammered out here will definately help save time during the CSM meeting as most points will have already been covered leaving it to be a simple vote then.
Also, knowing the positions of the CSM Members would be helpful to various interest groups as they'll know who they need to convince of the strength of their case to get an idea Raised/Dropped.
|
Farinet
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 08:54:00 -
[82]
|
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 10:00:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Farinet
Hehe, from your posting history one cannot deny...you exist to vote!
San Matari Official forums |
Nick Bison
Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Intrepid Proprietary Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 13:37:00 -
[84]
Edited by: Nick Bison on 15/08/2008 13:43:31 For me, the bottom line is twofold (for you goons, that means 2 parts)
1 - keep all moon-mining static. there is no appreciable value to the game in making them random as stated by various folk in this thread.
2 - Open moon-mining up to and including 0.6 systems. Granted, these moons may not be worth much but it there is no viable reason these moons should not be mined as all the data on them is already in-game. ------------------------- Side Note: i still find it funny how defensive the big 0.0 Alliances get when anyone even mentions how foolishly unballanced their private ISK-printing moons are to the game.
But seriously, maybe what needs to be looked into is makeing the top 4 moon-materials only produce 50% or 33% of the lower end moons?
NOTE: I gave this a thumbs up mark as I believe this does need to be discussed in the CSM meeting but I do NOT support moons being mined-out or the materials being moved randomly. Eve is not that old of a game and, in my opinion, it would probably take hundreds of years to actually exhaust a planetoid's resources.
|
Ifusikae Uiohyu
Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 18:01:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Nick Bison
2 - Open moon-mining up to and including 0.6 systems. Granted, these moons may not be worth much, but there is no viable reason these moons should not be mined as all the data on them is already in-game. ------------------------- Side Note: I still find it funny how defensive the big 0.0 Alliances get when anyone even mentions how foolishly unbalanced their private ISK-printing moons are to the game. Run-on sentence; see me after class.
Sorry, that was just staring at me, mocking me.
High-sec moon mining is also a terrible idea. You would think it would open up these "ISK-printers" to more people, but think about it for a second. Who lives in Empire? Most of the game. Where is it "foolishly" easier to make money? Empire. What do you think will happen when the capital-holding rich get a whiff of new moons, however low in value, now open to them? If you say anything but "snatch every damn one up in the span of about 2 weeks" you are an idiot.
And let's not even BEGIN to talk about how that affects Empire space. Suddenly you have deathstars in the middle of a "PVE-only" area.
The only result of this plan is a strengthened status quo and what may as well be an oligopoly (for you pubbie scum, this means economic dominance by a select few companies who will compete with one another until either A) one company goes bankrupt, or B) the two companies come to an agreement and gouge the shit out of prices).
PS: Moons are still not ISK-printers. Please see prior posts.
|
Nick Bison
Gallente Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Intrepid Proprietary Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 04:25:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Ifusikae Uiohyu
Sorry, that was just staring at me, mocking me.
High-sec moon mining is also a terrible idea. You would think it would open up these "ISK-printers" to more people, but think about it for a second. Who lives in Empire? Most of the game. Where is it "foolishly" easier to make money? Empire. What do you think will happen when the capital-holding rich get a whiff of new moons, however low in value, now open to them? If you say anything but "snatch every damn one up in the span of about 2 weeks" you are an idiot.
And let's not even BEGIN to talk about how that affects Empire space. Suddenly you have deathstars in the middle of a "PVE-only" area.
The only result of this plan is a strengthened status quo and what may as well be an oligopoly (for you pubbie scum, this means economic dominance by a select few companies who will compete with one another until either A) one company goes bankrupt, or B) the two companies come to an agreement and gouge the shit out of prices).
PS: Moons are still not ISK-printers. Please see prior posts.
You have some valid points here, couched in sarcasm. However, I must disagree that with your assertion that all these HiSec crappy-moons will be snatched up by the major alliances. In all cases of the moons I have been looking at in HiSec, not a one of them makes enough ISK to even pay for the fuel to keep a small POS running monthly.
That said, I will relook at my notes and run a few more scans to see if I have missed something that would better support your arguement.
Thanks for the input ...
|
waristina
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 09:22:00 -
[87]
Agree with the premise of making moon minerals a finite comodity.
|
Lord Testament
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 09:49:00 -
[88]
support
|
AgentX
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 16:22:00 -
[89]
Before something like this is even considered, the deployment and removal of towers needs a complete overhaul.
Spending 5-6 Hrs deploying and 4-5 hrs removing one tower every 3 months (multiply that by however many towers is currently run) just to keep the same production going, simply should not be an option.
|
Xam Nesse
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 20:01:00 -
[90]
Two things strike me: 1 - Goons almost universally don't want their private isk-farms disrupted and don't want anyone else (HiSec) to get any slice of the pie, no matter how small.
and
2 - BoB supports finite moon resources but wants it easier to move an entire POS. When you think of the size of a POS and all associated structures, I just can't see how a few hours work is that big a deal ... except when that means a few hundred million ISK to you.
Final thoughts: 1. I sure hope the CSM can discuss and perhaps propose a logical course of action or two. 2 - Yes, I am posting with an alt. |
|
Wendat Huron
Stellar Solutions
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 20:12:00 -
[91]
More game, less same same. |
SuperSarge
FIRMA Cosa Nostra.
|
Posted - 2008.08.19 08:41:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker I like that there are strategic resources in EVE and that alliances and corporations can know where they are and fight over them.
I do agree that the earnings are way out of whack, but I don't think the solution is to make minerals move around randomly. Instead, maybe the devs should just seed more Dysprosium moons to cause the price to fall.
EVE is a big place and it should be possible for a small alliance (200-300 people) to stake out a little industrial foothold of its own. The small number of Dysprosium moons, coupled with the importance of that mineral, means that large alliances can, and should, monopolize them.
+1 |
Sarin Adler
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.08.19 10:43:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Chodie101 However, that said - there is something that can realistically shift and change, which is technological advancement - in the same way we are looking to achieve the same ends oil does for us with other things (biofuels etc) how about some kind of RP technological advancement which enables us to make synthetic dysprosium by mining chains of other materials?
This could be set up with a similar idea to invention and t2 bpo, where a dyspro moon-holder still has the best moon (like a t2 bpo holder still has the best resource) as he gets dyspro directly from his moon, but other players can make synthetic dysprosium with a larger time / pos network investment and correspondingly smaller profit margin in exactly the same way you can build t2 gear but with more work and smaller profit than the bpo owner does.
This did not get much attention but IMO is spot on, there are a lot of materials that can be synthetized from other raw materials. It probably would be less efficient than mining dymprosium directlly but still would give the option to produce synthetic materials (this an be extended to other areas as well). IMO this is a win-win situation: it gives an edge to the moon owners over synthetic producers (which would still need to work hard to produce it), it allows competition without monopolization of resources, and it boosts the industry in the game, which is allways a good thing.
+1 to that suggestion. |
Qual
Gallente Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2008.08.19 10:44:00 -
[94]
I dont think the solution is depletion of moons.
Differentiate the output of moons.
Step one: Make low ends output more and high ends less. Step two: Make all moons offer more different resources. Step three: Make it possible to mine multiple deposits of the same resource.
So in effect alliances could still dominate high ends, but the number of moons they would have to cover would be larger. They would be attracted to moons with multiple high end deposits. |
Qual
Gallente Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2008.08.19 10:46:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Sarin Adler
Originally by: Chodie101 However, that said - there is something that can realistically shift and change, which is technological advancement - in the same way we are looking to achieve the same ends oil does for us with other things (biofuels etc) how about some kind of RP technological advancement which enables us to make synthetic dysprosium by mining chains of other materials?
This could be set up with a similar idea to invention and t2 bpo, where a dyspro moon-holder still has the best moon (like a t2 bpo holder still has the best resource) as he gets dyspro directly from his moon, but other players can make synthetic dysprosium with a larger time / pos network investment and correspondingly smaller profit margin in exactly the same way you can build t2 gear but with more work and smaller profit than the bpo owner does.
This did not get much attention but IMO is spot on, there are a lot of materials that can be synthetized from other raw materials. It probably would be less efficient than mining dymprosium directlly but still would give the option to produce synthetic materials (this an be extended to other areas as well). IMO this is a win-win situation: it gives an edge to the moon owners over synthetic producers (which would still need to work hard to produce it), it allows competition without monopolization of resources, and it boosts the industry in the game, which is allways a good thing.
+1 to that suggestion.
Aye! I really like that one as well! |
ian666
Rave Technologies Inc. C0VEN
|
Posted - 2008.08.26 14:04:00 -
[96]
|
Ackuula
|
Posted - 2008.08.26 18:33:00 -
[97]
all the resources need to behave this way
asteroids, moons, ice fields, complexes, even agents
|
Padanemi
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 13:08:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Nick Bison I believe that any overhaul of moon-mining "must" include opening up moon mining in 0.5 and 0.6 - as I understand this was a feature of the game a few years back but was removed as part of the (now failed) program to force people into 0.0 space.
With Dyspo (and the other top 3) moons netting the Uber-Allainces billions of ISK a month per moon, where is the major harm in allowing the small research corps using the crappy moon-materials in HiSec to help offset the cost of their POS's?
Too true.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |