open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Mining
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (18)

Author Topic

Rees Noturana
Red Rock Mining Company
Posted - 2011.08.15 14:26:00 - [31]

I can see how removing ice from high sec would aid in their goal for pushing T2 production out to null sec. I won't be particularly happy about it but I'll adapt. The 'smallholding' concept and the ability to live in NPC null sec on a smaller scale than living within the large alliances are appealing and may make up for it.

I don't have a great deal of time where I'm in-game and able to undock. I've tried living in null sec twice only to deal with many months of war and eventually leaving my new home far less richer and without participating in the things that really interest me. Exciting times but I found myself logging in far less since I needed to be much more active or suffer from 'get in fleet or log out'. If my small corp and myself could carve out a 'smallholding' and partake in T2 industry and exploration based mining I'd leave high sec in a heartbeat.

As far as ice goes I think you should consider a total redesign on the mechanics. Make it available in low sec as an exploration site too. Mining in general needs a new breed of mining vessels. Harvesters and haulers that are more agile and able to defend enough to get out once hostiles are in the system. Having a squad defending is not economical with today's mineral market.


Remove high sec ice later in the process. I'd push for the smallholdings and an over all redesign of ice and mineral harvesting, especially with an exploration focus. This would give the smaller corps a chance to establish themselves in more dangerous territories before the big alliances have a chance to strangle us with the price of ice fuels.

Posted - 2011.08.15 14:34:00 - [32]

while I approve in theory I can't help but think that CCP has spent the last 8 years creating this little carebear utopia in highsec and catering to the criminally lazy.

See, here's the key, the lazy part.

heres whats going to happen.
CCP removes the benefits of industry/mining in empire

lazy bears quit and subscribe to KOTOROL (which should be up and running by then)
null remains empty, universal prices skyrocket due to production losses.

welcome to chapter 11

I guess the meat of this is, if you totally turn everything upside down 8 years in, you will screw the pooch.

Really, reading some of those notes made me ask what game the DEVs are playing

Sandra Smith
Posted - 2011.08.15 14:37:00 - [33]

From an immersion/RP/common sense perspective null sec should be resource rich but facilities poor compared with Empire.

Simplest solution to boost null mining is not to remove/move anything from elsewhere but to provide a yield multiplier based on system sec status/soverenty. So the same miner in the same ship mining the same asteroids will get more yield the lower sec status is.

Wrong thread I know but could apply the same idea to invention output i.e. ME modifier based on sec status where invention job takes place.

Erinyes Nazgul
Posted - 2011.08.15 14:51:00 - [34]

This is a great idea:

Sole source of ice and high-end minerals

1. Ice should be a limited asset just like 'roids. Make them pop. No more unlimited ice mining regardless of location.

2. Ice in high sec should yield proportionally less than low or null sec. Ideally zero (see #3 below).

3. Remove ice from high sec. ...this is what you propose. Awesome.

You cannot have a discussion on mining and income without discussing LOOT drops and refining loot.

I propose that high sec loot should only refine into high sec minerals or, at least, significantly less than they do now.

Joe Risalo
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:04:00 - [35]

Putting ice only in null sec would be the worst possible suggestion in game.

Ice is a necessity in high sec.

When a corp/alliance wants to start up, they start in high sec. To be competitive with current null alliances they have to be prepared before they even enter null.
So having the ice in high sec allows alliances to actually be created and be effective.

Removing ice from high sec is one of few things in the game that would actually crash the game and allow one over powering alliance to eventually control everything.

he who had the most ice would be the strongest and able to take ice from others.

So HELL NO to ice only in null sec.

Rees Noturana
Red Rock Mining Company
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:04:00 - [36]

I've mentioned it in the smallholdings thread but I'll post it here as well: give us smallholdings with the ability to do T2 production on a small scale before you remove ice. My indy guy becomes a target for pirates and roaming gangs, but he gets to continue doing what he does outside of high sec. Just allow him to find exploration ice so he can actually harvest it without being slaughtered every other day doing it.

ZC Industries
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:13:00 - [37]

ArrowMining should be something that you do because you know you're achieving something, not just because it makes you money - the minerals created should be contributing towards larger goals.

There already do. i used the isk from mining to buy skills when i started playing eve, mission running just suck. just the same few missions you do over and over again. where is the fun in that?

Iron Breaker
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:23:00 - [38]

Most of the ice mined in high-sec is for the null-sec people, so I can understand how removing ice from high-sec might be considered. If CCP wants people to do more null-sec mining, rather then remove high-sec ice, reduice the amounts that cen be mined. There is no reason for people starting EVE to mine ice because it is more profitible to mine ore. Making less ice aviable in high-sec would encourage more null-sec mining operations, by driving up prices in high-sec; thus helping out starting players, and as more people mined ice, reducing the amount of ice that can be mined by bots. Also, increasing the mining speed of ice miners would help stop botting for ice, because it is prety darn booring mining for ice... low profit + booring = someone using a bot. (Not me)

Jareck Hunter
Rubicon Legion
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:24:00 - [39]

Edited by: Jareck Hunter on 15/08/2011 15:34:26
Edited by: Jareck Hunter on 15/08/2011 15:34:08
Well, i would like to see the content of the roids changed based on the security status from the system.

Lets say Veldspar will only contain x Tritanium and can be found in 1.0 and lower.

Kernit will contain the x units of Tritanium and additional y units of Nocxium or so and will be 0.7 and lower and contains also pyr and mex in smaller numbers.

Arkonor, will have x Tritanium, y Nocxium and z Megacyte and all the other mineral and will be -0.5 and lower and so on. So you can mine it, earn money with it and get low end mins too.

Also there could be different kinds of "named" ore based on sec status, like a +10% in 0.7, +20% in 0.5, +40% in 0.1, +60% in -0,5 and +100% in -1.

So you can find "super-veldspar" in deep 0.0, that gives 2 times more trit than the one in safe empire regions.
With this system you can also give boni to different regions, when you say that you can only find "super-arkonor" in one region.

To remove boredom can we get a system like in miner wars?^^

Servilia Junii
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:26:00 - [40]

Edited by: Servilia Junii on 15/08/2011 15:48:26
Edited by: Servilia Junii on 15/08/2011 15:31:46
Originally by: Thomas Turnpoint

wh's are, in fact, null sec. Big surprise, i know. (OMGNOLOCALITSNOTNULLSEC!NERFNERFNERF!) shut it. Wh's have sleepers, null sec has The Maze. By your logic, i should get officer/faction spawns if i even lived in a wh.

iso officer sleeper tank/damage mods.

Idea on Ice:
1. Remove the monster belts that exist in high sec and replace them with smaller belts. Lower the amount available in each rock.
2. Move more ice belts to low-sec. Leave their size alone, (meaning 400+ km across) but keep the over all density of the rocks low.
3. Make a Ice mining (gravimetric?) exploration site. Keep these to low-sec and null-sec and scale them appropriately. No Dark Glitter for you, cearbear.
4. FIX THE ICE MINING MECHANIC! 5 minute cycle time for 3 pieces of ice is ******. (OMG I HAVE ALL LEVEL V SKILLS AND IT ONLY TAKES ME [insert time] TO MINE 10 BITS OF ICE) shut it. If mining normal ore isn't boring enough for you, there is always ice mining. Put this in low-sec and suddenly you'll be lucky to make it 1 cycle before your ship is a ball of burning debris.
4a. Maybe instead of 1000 m3^ chunks, make Ice like any other ore. X required to refine. Y m3^ per minute. Produces Z fuel type. etc. Even consider just mixing ice in with normal asteroids and doing away with ice belts all together.
5. Bring back station spinning.

There, added a bit of stuff for low-sec and null-sec.

Idea on wh ore problem:
1. Take arkanor and bistot out of class 1&2 wormholes.
2. Off set this with higher amounts of mid level ore and keep crokite in small amounts just to keep them chomping at the bit for more.
3. Class 3 and up have ABC but no mercoxit. Thus more t2 production in null sec [(?) still redundant]
4. Don't let class 3's spawn in high-sec. No more mining ark 2 jumps from Jita Rolling Eyes
5. Class 1 & 2 still connect to class 3's. Ninja mining: Engaged. (OMG CAN'T BE DONE! WAY TO HARD) shut it. Risk vs Reward.
6. Bring back station spinning.

There, your wh mining problem is fixed with room to spare.

Of course, what do i know. ugh

Tower of Ravens
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:31:00 - [41]

Originally by: S8nt
1. There has to be a reason to move to null sec, moving all ICE there would benefit low sec and give people that are prepared to take the risk all the return they deserve. Too many people macro ICE mining.

2. Maybe we should get sleeper sites in null sec then? Every different type of space should have a benefit. I cannot get Sleeper loot from 0.0 but I can mine ores. It should be the same other way round.

If I specialize in something I want to get maximum return for it, otherwise it's a waste of time to even try.

Removing high-end ores from wh space is not going to give folks a reason to move to 0.0. The problems of 0.0 have nothing to do with resources, and everything to do with logistics and lag.

To answer your question though - 0.0 already has moon minerals and is also the best exploration and ratting to be had.

Removing high-end ores from wspace and ice from hs is a horrible idea that is clearly not thought out. All that it is going to accomplish is to cause the cost of ice products and T2 components to skyrocket.

Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:42:00 - [42]

Originally by: S8nt
1. There has to be a reason to move to null sec, moving all ICE there would benefit low sec and give people that are prepared to take the risk all the return they deserve. Too many people macro ICE mining.

W8 a sec.

Where are the proofs of what you're talking about?
-because the high sec ice belts where I mine I see the same guys since one year and some new ones. Now every one in this ****ing game knows where bots are most used and some times by dozens: null sec

So if you guys are about to keep saying the same stupid false arguments again and again, at least prove it. Because in what concerns null sec alliances using them it's not a secret for anyone, now in high sec? -sure maybe a few ones but there are so many "anti-bot" nerds at each belt you'll never do anything than believe yourself in what you're talking about.

Ice should not be removed completely from high sec has end ores from worm holes, for what I see in this forum the only requiring this are goonies their alts or corps not having other choice than post "yes sir", another terrible idea for the whole game community coming once again from your alliance and has many other of your ideas concern your selfish point of view.

If you can't recruit miners to mine ice/ores in your belts maybe you should spend more isk protecting them or lower your rent prices of space you're incapable to defend properly.
Even better, stop being *******s you'll find people interested to join you other than 1 week noobiesLaughing and help you with ice mining, hell you would even stop begging at eve tv Laughing

Lady Ayeipsia
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:50:00 - [43]

Edited by: Lady Ayeipsia on 15/08/2011 15:53:24
I would cancel all 3 of my subscriptions if ice were removed from hi sec. The idea of removing ice seems to do nothing more than benefit large alliances.

As it stands now, for a small amarr pos with limited modules online, I must send 8 hours ice mining to produce enough fuel for a week. this saves me an operational expense of about 70 mil isk per month. The loss of ice mining would force me to be at the mercy of the mining alliances who would supply the costs. I would expect the costs to negate any profit gain for my pos, and would lose funding.

Without a pos, i would lose my income from invention and production. I works be forced to send all week ratting or missioning to pay for my supplies. Not please mind u, just ships lost to pvp with my main toon who is in nul. And no, my alliance is too small to support ship programs nor do they have organized indy efforts. We are all on our own.

Given the amount of time I would have to invest in pve with the removal of ice, I works have limited time for oblong. At that point, why bother playing? So basically, removal of a major commodity out of my reach would mean i move to a new game.

So sorry, but I have to say that the removal of hi sec ice would lose ccp 3 subs and I doubt I am alone in this group.

Posted - 2011.08.15 16:04:00 - [44]

If (ice)mining in empire is done by bots or people who are supposedly ******s or whatever other word you can come up with, who will be mining ice in null sec then ?
Surely you dont want your precious highsec puppies you disrespect now to come to your place and throw their "unpleasant" playstyle right into your face.
And if not them, then who else would mine the ice out there ? The "l33t" pvpers ?
Or maybe Gggrhui and his palls 123456K, J57ddd etc etc.

Posted - 2011.08.15 16:06:00 - [45]

Removing ice from high sec. Unacceptable.

Removing ABC ores from any of the WHs. Unacceptable.

Silent Service Operations
Posted - 2011.08.15 16:14:00 - [46]

Oh, I can see the 0.0 alliances are starving to move everything to null and low. More victims, they think.

The fact is, most of the people who mine for fun(I freely admit to income and safety as being my motivation for being in high sec now) do not enjoy some random tard blowing up months of work and resource gathering in 30seconds, just because they get a rush out of blowing up stuff. Take away the ore and ice, and they will not go to 0.0(and for the record, I've been there, small and large corps, alliances, single groups).

Fighting for space is exciting, but pvp is only one aspect of the game. Many will leave if the reward for their efforts is taken away.

This is mining we are talking about. Give us the tools, and update the ones we have. Nomad groups that strike into null are rare, and the cost is very high. Make it possible to do this with the right tools.

Posted - 2011.08.15 16:18:00 - [47]

Originally by: Cuhlen
Originally by: S8nt
1. There has to be a reason to move to null sec, moving all ICE there would benefit low sec and give people that are prepared to take the risk all the return they deserve. Too many people macro ICE mining.

2. Maybe we should get sleeper sites in null sec then? Every different type of space should have a benefit. I cannot get Sleeper loot from 0.0 but I can mine ores. It should be the same other way round.

If I specialize in something I want to get maximum return for it, otherwise it's a waste of time to even try.

Removing high-end ores from wh space is not going to give folks a reason to move to 0.0. The problems of 0.0 have nothing to do with resources, and everything to do with logistics and lag.

To answer your question though - 0.0 already has moon minerals and is also the best exploration and ratting to be had.

Removing high-end ores from wspace and ice from hs is a horrible idea that is clearly not thought out. All that it is going to accomplish is to cause the cost of ice products and T2 components to skyrocket.

Asif you cant find and enter wormholes from null, right ? You know, scan them down, explore them, detail their exits, curbstomp the locals, claim it all for your precious null sec alliance,, but hey /effort.

Posted - 2011.08.15 16:24:00 - [48]

Just scrap the whole idea of low sec, null sec, and high sec. Just make the whole game 0.0 You want people to fight and have conflict and form groups/gangs/clicks and fight each other.

You want to get rid of the carebears and macro/bot players. You are literally trying to make null sec the one stop shop for everything. OH THEY DONT HAVE ENOUGH LOW END ORES, lets give them more. OH MINING IS TO RISKY, so lets make it more profitable. and lets give them total control over all the minerals too. they already have all the high ends. that why there is even a distinction between low and high end ores. Some you can get in abundance and are cheap (low ends) and others are harder and riskier to get (high ends). so just put all the ore in 0.0 and F*%! industry over.

better yet, improve the ore in 0.0 but enable moon mining in high sec like PI. that would lower the t2 cost and eliminate some of the RMT from the game.

and really why is the rorqual still restricted from high sec. it has the offensive capabilities of a cruiser.

Shadow Wind
Crimson Empire.
Posted - 2011.08.15 16:25:00 - [49]

Please give me feedback:

- Redistribute ores throughout EVE. One regions value shouldn't be better than another. Maybe have a more Arkanor in one region with less Bistot and then the other region the reverse. The ISK per hour should be the same though.

- Mining low ends should give the same ISK per hour or slightly less as high ends(In low sec and null Sec ONLY).

- Allow Rorquals to crush different density ores together or remove "ore condensing" for "Ore refining & Mineral condensing." Reduce ice consumption, increase bonuses given on Rorqual. Same deal goes for Ice.

- Remove the alloys from the drone regions, add a bit of data cores, Planetary Interface goods, bounty, & hacking sites to balance.

- A better loot logger type device for mining would also help greatly with group mining. Somehow get a tally of all ore mined so that distribution can be done fairly. Many a time we have group mined and been done in by people that have inefficiently mined or just havn't been commited to train up mining skills. Also to find out Cherry pickers during a given week in a system.

- Need some balancing/incentive so corporations can collect mineral taxes rather than setting spreadsheet "Quotas." Mining/Industry corps should make self supporting isk through production using resources provided by members. Maybe use a "corporation mine logging" tool so directors and set quota based on amount mined to make it a little easier on the casual player.

- Create more mineral sinks. Make Titans and Super carriers use more resources, stations use more minerals. POS modules and structures use more minerals.

- Make Highsec ice mining yield less with limited and highly sought after grav sites only, basically enough to seed markets at a premium and rewarding price.

- For that matter, if we make all high and mid end ores mineable only through scanned down sites (think half the size of small sites.)
Much like nullsec sanctums/havens. Each "Mining Haven" Should have low end/mid end that give greater yields than empire space, (maybe two orca hauling runs worth.) and each grav site has the opportunity to spawn an "officer roid" e.g. mercoxite.

Then for the "Mining Sanctums" Have mid end/high end ores that give greater yield based on level of nullsec, with the "officer roid" that gives a much greater yield of dense mercoxite and the occasional actual officer spawn or hauler spawn. Maybe enough m3 for 4 or 5 Orca Hauls worth.
Basically enough more dense yield m3 to do atleast a few orca runs to keep those ships balanced and worth it.

Yields should be increased all around to make up for time lost moving between grav sites and hauling - then slightly reduce yields to increase profitability per hour.
While this wouldn't directly eliminate botting, it would make it much more difficult to manage (one would hope.)
While we're at it, you can make a separate alternate version of these "grav sites" but for ice instead.

If you think about it, mining in small groups would increase chances for better spawns through speeding through these gravsites.

For the larger mining operations with larger groups of people, have the occasional "Mining Complex" Where your fleet warps in, mines super dense low ends with officers/haulers, then takes acceleration gate to Super dense mid range ores, then acceleration to high ends followed by a cluster of dense mercoxite with enough value to warrant docking up, returning with skiff/mackinaws.
The whole goal here is to move the isk generation more to the pockets of active miners and less to the pockets of botters. At the same time we're removing the monotony of constantly jettisoning cans in stationary.

- More common availability of gas clouds in nullsec.

Mining should make a healthy profit and be the backbone of a corporation. When an alliance is attacked in nullsec, it should be for space for good moons and higher mining yields and "safer" pockets to do industrial activities, among all the other reasons for sov in nullsec

Bombay Door
Posted - 2011.08.15 16:38:00 - [50]

Regarding Ice mining. I agree that the endless supply in high-sec space should be removed; however, I do not agree that it should be limited to Null-Sec space alone.

This idea presents an opportunity to low-sec space. While ensuring that the value of ice products are inline with effort in both training time and acquisition, we can elevate the value of both low-sec and null sec space at the same time.


Ice should be in null and low sec space statically and in high sec dynamically (Grav-sites)

Killer Gandry
Shadow of the Pain
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:11:00 - [51]

This is the kinda crap you get when you have CCP tards and null sec tards around a table with a lot of alcohol.
CCP keeps thinking within the sandbox they designed for themselves and luckily there are some rejects who moved to null sec who feel the same way about the precious sandbox.

However getting their collective heads out of their arses and see that their sandbox is a lot more than the linear playingfield they started with is beyond their small narrowminded concepts.

CCP's answer to most issues has always been some form of nerf or a totally unworkable boost somewhere else.
They are stuck in the same paradigm they created years ago and the inovative side of EVE is depleted.
It all remains the same just that stuff get's moved from left to right and then a while later from right to left again.
Buff one thing and nerf 20 other things. All in the idea of what EVE was back in 2003-2004.

They hardly grasp that EVE could have evolved to something way bigger and more diverse which appeals to many more people.
The only goal they can see is that people should move to null sec for the big rewards.

They created the world of Greed is Good and Conflict is a Must and anything living outside those 2 idea's is something so darn illuster to them that they can't even see over the rim of their narrow sandboxes.

Basicly CCP created the ultimate PvP experience by putting a gun to EVE's head and now all we have to do is wait when the trigger get's pulled

Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:11:00 - [52]

While I understand what the devs are doing I have no idea where they get their idea's from.

Zydrine and Megacyte will not magically increase in price. The only thing that will happen is that low ends will drop in price, which will result in a drop in the price of ships and either even fewer people mining in high-sec or more bots. Megacyte and Zydrine almost entirely come from 0.0 already, how are you going to boost a miner's income by making them exclusive? Do you intend to remove those minerals from WH's, which have a small impact anyway or do you intend to remove them from refined loot? How about drone regions, where the only income is the loot? I doubt we'll go back to Megacyte being cheap when it drops to 4000 and Zydrine being at least 2500.

The one thing these changes will do is benefit ship builders. It takes many a freighter to build a mothership or titan. It will make it far, far easier for those people to obtain their low ends (a fleet of titans requires more low ends than on the market in Jita), which, as I said, will cause low ends to drop in high sec.

Removing ice from high sec will force prices to unseen heights, pushing T2 and other production costs up astronomically. I don't know whether this is the idea or not but this will be the consequence.

I hope the devs actually think things through before they start throwing them at us, but as always the only hope is that they don't cause too much of a disaster.

If this is done right and mineral prices do go up I will gladly mine high ends again but the hope of the devs listening to the players is at -10% and things going horribly wrong at 200%.

Claire Voyant
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:12:00 - [53]

What does this even mean?

"Nullsec should be the only place we're injecting (at least some of the) ices, zydrine, megacyte and morphite into the game."

Liz Laser
The New Era
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:12:00 - [54]

1) Hi-Sec POS owners need to be able to get their ice in hi-sec.


2) Whatever you do with ice and minerals (in any sec-status), stagger the spawns across timezones, rather than an entire refresh at each downtime. (Apologies if you've already taken this advice, I haven't been a serious miner in years).

3) Giving null-sec the ability to mine massively more Veldspar in the same time period than a miner in hi-sec is entirely the wrong approach. If you want to encourage mining in null-sec make it so that PvP losses aren't as costly. If you make mining ships cheaper or give DAMN GOOD insurance on t2 mining ships, you'll see more mining occur.

4) If you *DO* get people to mine enough Veldspar in null-sec, you're going to remove the biggest reason for developing logistical expertise. Not having to make Jita runs removes some needs for cooperation, as well as many opportunities to pirate shipments. Seriously, it sounds like null sec just wants to be free from dealing with low sec piracy by not having to buy trit from high sec.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.15 17:25:00 - [55]

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
While I find the design goals for mining quite acceptable, a lot of people don't do it because it's just boring.

Are there any plans to change mining gameplay to be more interesting or challenging? If so, can you expand on this? If not, are you not worried people still won't do it - this is a game afterall and the primary goal is to have fun?

Nothing, solid, no. I know this will sound crazy to some of you, but mining's currently filling a pretty decent niche by not being exciting. Most importantly, it's something that gives you an excuse to sit around chatting to people without leaving you destitute. People who like action have missions and PvP and so on; mining doesn't work for those people and doesn't need to be changed so that it does.

That's not to say that there aren't ways we could improve it, but (for example) adding a minigame where you have to focus on the screen is probably not going to appeal to the people who actually mine.

(And yes lolbots, obviously.)

Originally by: RG Sneaker
Edited by: RG Sneaker on 15/08/2011 11:26:19
Will Ice mining in hi sec end?
I might just close my hi sec POS then :-(

Thinking about it a bit, not sure where we're going to go. We might not change it at all, we might just make hisec belts deplete (and regen as normal) so they can roughly meet hisec demand.

Originally by: Darod Zyree
Edited by: Darod Zyree on 15/08/2011 11:28:18
Since wormholes were specifically mentioned in the industry paragrah, does this mean that when talking about mining ice and ABCs will/should become nullsec thing only? meaning no more in wormholes even while wormholes being 0.0 space too?

Ok, so here's the thing about wormhole space: it doesn't need mining as a reward type. All the other stuff you can get out of sleeper sites is more than enough to make w-space viable as an area of the game, with the sorts of activities we were hoping to cater for with it. Further, having miners sitting around in sites (and/or warping off starbases) doesn't really add a whole lot to the overall dynamic. The only thing it's really achieving is giving people a pretty safe place to mine high-ends and make a lot of money.

Nullsec on the other hand benefits a lot from having mining ops around - they add a lot to the overall ecosystem. As it stands though it seems to be the case that minerals from wormholes are depressing the prices of high-ends and making it not really that profitable to mine them in nullsec. Given this, finding ways to stop people mining high-ends in wormholes to sell on the market is a good thing for us.

That said, wormholes do need smallish amounts of high-ends for on-site construction. This is something we'd prefer to maintain, as we like a bit of self-sufficiency. The problem is supplying them in a way such that organized groups can still get enough to build, without allowing people to sit in C2s all day mining ABCs. One of the things we're looking at in this regard is ensuring there are high-end rocks inside combat sites, so that if you want your high-ends for construction you can have the barges roll in along with the looters and salvagers once sites are cleared, but you need to be continually clearing combat sites to keep your miners busy.

Jareck Hunter
Rubicon Legion
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:43:00 - [56]

Edited by: Jareck Hunter on 15/08/2011 17:44:12
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
That's not to say that there aren't ways we could improve it, but (for example) adding a minigame where you have to focus on the screen is probably not going to appeal to the people who actually mine.

A PI-like Minigame for mining would be nice, bots could have some problems finding the right spots and miners would have something to do while mining, but they would also have a small disadvantage in 0.0, when they have to concentrate on local/intelchannels and look after the minigame. Maybe when it's optional (t3 mining?) it would be something.

Can we get some % numbers about how much ore comes from WH in the markets?

Posted - 2011.08.15 17:44:00 - [57]

This is a load of crap

You are going to break game mechanics that are working just fine. I don't want to go into Null-Sec because of the politics and care bear whiners.

How can you tell me that mining in a wormhole is safer than in NullSec? So sitting behind 10 gatecamps isn't safe at all? Being able to see who is in system through local chat doesn't make it any safer? Please. Mining in wormholes is dangerous. I like being able to go out into a WH, set up my POS and start mining. I am not going there to run sites. You are focusing on combat characters and throwing the rest of us to the dogs. Mining in wormhole space is significantly more dangerous - I have no idea who is in system (especially if they are out of D-Scan Range or in a cloaked ship) All they have to do is D-Scan me down, fire off probes and they have a lock on me in 30 seconds. Warp there cloaked, sit and wait for a combat ship to arrive. Now some miners would have no idea all of this is going on. And you want to tell me this is safer than Null Sec? Where you can see the attack coming from a mile away? Are you guys that ignorant?

More over in Wormhole space we are not guaranteed a Grav Site as they rotate around on the system you designed.

What is the point in having a High Sec POS if you cannot mine ice in High Sec? Tell me how that makes sense?

You have no valid reason to remove ABC ore from Wormhole Space. The logistic nightmare makes Wormholes a lot more dangerous and a lot harder to operate out of than Null Sec. Leave it the way it is.

Keep in mind we cannot mine the moons there as well, let us mine something.

Posted - 2011.08.15 17:47:00 - [58]

removing ice from high sec would simply mean no more high sec poses, it would literally be impossible to run them at any kind of profit without access to high sec ice, they would all go dark, i wonder why ccp wants to do this, is it related to the reason faction towers dont drop anymore?

Posted - 2011.08.15 17:48:00 - [59]

Edited by: Miraqu on 15/08/2011 17:53:13
I would like to get rid of the static belts.

Mining should require scanning, make mining anomalies that work like the pirate anomalies, but need probes. Then the players could upgrade it. An anomaly should only have sufficient ore for a 10-player mining gang to mine about an hour. Then you would need to probe the next anomaly. They should despawn as soon as mined out.

Have many different mining anomalies, so that gangs are not easy targets in the one and only anomaly. Also you should not need one large gang in an easy scannable part of space. This would make it somewhat safer. Same for the ice. There should be ice-anomalies with varying types of ice. The type of the ice should be random.

Make superdense low-end asteroids, which can only be mined with a capital mining ship. The ship has a siege mode, which would immobilize it for one cycle for 10 minutes. Those ships should be able to spider-tank with each other and a rorqual.

The mined ore chunks should be 400k m and should require a real freighter to take it to a refining station. They cannot be compressed and give a huge volume of low ends.

Mining upgrades (which need a reasonable activity to be installed) should reduce system upkeep. Maybe the larger alliances would then be willing to have some non-pvp pilots / corps in their ranks.

Edit: Typos

Posted - 2011.08.15 17:56:00 - [60]

Originally by: Ya Huei
1. Change mining so that its either FUN to do, or completely automated by placing anchorable extractors in belts so that it can be done unattended.

2. please do the math on the removal of wh abc's before you actually remove them. I am convinced most, of the mined ores are consumed locally for ship production, and not sold. Removing them will force W-space dwellers to do many more itty 5 hauls while we probably only represent an insignificant market effect.

3. if u do end up removing abc's from w-space then strip the requirements for those minerals from t3 production chains.

If you can't do 1, do 2. If you can't do 1 or 2 do 3. If you can't do 1 2 or 3....

Also, I think if you remove all high ends from WH and ice from HS you should also remove missions above level 2.

Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (18)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only