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

Scandal Caulker
Posted - 2011.08.16 08:48:00 - [121]
 

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1561215

My two cents on a mining overhaul. It's a little extreme but it does encourage mining large volumes of low end minerals and encourages small scale PvP

Azhrell Dewc
Posted - 2011.08.16 09:01:00 - [122]
 

Before I can say much about anything here I need a few numbers from CCP ..
How much Ice are mined in EMPIRE vs 0.0 and how much are used In empire+low sec vs 0.0

then I need to know How much research are done in Empire+low sec vs 0.0

My reason not to be in 0.0

1 I'm a miner. 0.0 is impossible for me to do anything in except i was in one of the 6 biggest alliances of one of their friend alliances. Reason for this is a hulk is a expensive t2 ship with NO ability to tank a battleship (0.0 use caps)
2. I don't want to be part of the Drama out there so i have kept to Empire.

3. I never hear about goons or any one else make great speeches about how they encourage their members to be industrials. on the other hand I hear so often from industrial ppl that their "local" alliance ****s them over and leave them in the dust for the chance of killing something.

4. a full mining fleet is a huge investment and a stealth bomber can kill it.

5. it is too easy for a fleet to roam 20 systems and find the miners.


My ideas.

1. Move the ice to 0.5 and below. improve the rats in 0.5 systems and below so afk mining wouldn't be so easy.

2. let the ice in 0.5 to 0.2 be able to be depleted.

3. let the special Ore become even more sites. and not in the belts only. i say remove the belts, and make a new system
3b. Make the belts bigger. (4000 km long) make all asteroids look the same (no type) then you have to target and scan the asteroids for find out what type of ore it contains. so it will take more time to locate it. The reason for this is that you need to move more and be active. while you sit and mine you scan the next 20 rocks. the asteroids don't disappear they just become "empty" for some time. example Roid A is on 300 Million M≥ and 100k M≥ is useful ore. a mix of different types

4. a ship close to a asteroid in a grave site shouldn't be scan able. it stays in the asteroid's shadow.

5. make the exhumers more damage resident (not like those paper boats)



in the end let Empire keep ice and basic ore. .. and let the alliances keep the rat sites out there.

PS: sorry for my bad english

corbby
Posted - 2011.08.16 09:49:00 - [123]
 

any chance we could get some figures on the amount of hulks, covertor and retrievers in hisec, low sec, null and wh space.

Then figures on the amount of these ships being lost in each of hisec, low sec, null sec and w space. then you shoudl be able to get a simple % on just which area is safest and most dangerous to mine in (as at the moment peopel seem to think 0.0 mining is incredibly dangerous and risky)

and then figures on the amount of high end abc being mined in w space and exported to empire.

without any solid figures to back anything up everything is very subjective, i imagine the logs show nothing but come on ccp lets have some figures before coming up with random ideals

Franny
Mentis Seorsum
Posted - 2011.08.16 09:51:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Azhrell Dewc
3. I never hear about goons or any one else make great speeches about how they encourage their members to be industrials. on the other hand I hear so often from industrial ppl that their "local" alliance ****s them over and leave them in the dust for the chance of killing something.

you won't

Fran will always be my 'main' despite the fact I play my industrialist more, but 0.0 industrialists are treated worse than pets
pets want to make 'profit', and are expected to to pay rent
industrialists are expected to work for nothing, all day every day

Shin Dari
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 10:32:00 - [125]
 


Move all mining, in all zones, to exploration. However make sure you have agents to hand out mining missions to starting miners (no experience with exploration) in which the NPC provides the 'bookmark' but takes a 50% cut.

Also I would give all zones access to all minerals, however in different quantities and ratios.
High sec: medium amount of ore - low ratio of high value ore
Low sec: small amount of ore - equal amounts of everything.
Null sec: high amount of ore - high ratio of high value ore
Wormhole: Amount dependent upon class (higher class -> more ore) - equal amounts of everything.

If CCP wants to remove all high end minerals from high sec, please just make sure that manufacturing T1 ammo doesn't require high end minerals. People that mission need to manufacture their own ammo.

Have all moon resources switch region every two weeks. So if someone want to keep mining a specific type of moon goo then they will have to continuously move/fight in null sec.

PanKrolik
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:03:00 - [126]
 

I would change how roids ore is distributed. I would make it that one roid type would provide all asociated ores in different amount. To know exact values it would be necessary to scan it. Soo you use scaner on a omber rock and get x m3 10% omber 90% golden omber. Soo using a laser at 100m3 per cycle would give miner 10m3 of omber 90m3 of golden omber. Maybe even consider puting different ore types in same rock. T2 crystals would allow to cherry pick good ore leaving bad one in roid.

Ice miner cycle should be cut to 25% of its current value cube size and amount of product from it adjusted to 1/4 of current one. Ice should run out like normal rodids do.

Introduce new ores only avaible throu exploration. Just few ideas:
Geodes containing crystals with very high concentration of certain mineral. Can be mined only using normal mining lasers and is chance based so at end of cycle you can get info that you didnt extraced anything of value/got crystal or rock is empty. Those crystals should have higest m3 to refined amount value in game.
Planetoides that would contain ores that can be refined to moon goo and must be mined using stripminers.
Comets with ice including exploration only ice types.

Delianora
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:09:00 - [127]
 

What you basicly need is what CCP is proposing...

A soft reset of the game...

Remove ice, abc ore, etc...

Rebuild the game with its core principles of risk and reward...

Sure u will lose 50000 accounts BUT unlike incarna, u have made the game a solid foundation again so u can quickly rescale it back up.

Simple as that...

Also to bad the 0.0 bots...

CCP codes their own invisible bot ships that we cant see but bots can...

Then CCP just has their own bot ships sit in local...

We never know they are there, but the client knows--have them cloaked...

Then all the bots are frozen as they "see someone" in local.

Clansworth
Good Rock Materials
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:11:00 - [128]
 

OKay, so mining revamp threads are a plenty, and many great ideas have been posted going back many years. A lot of suggestions (even here) are about trying to make mining more 'interesting' so more people want to do it. I'm not sure this is the direction to take. Mining is a completely different style of play, and I feel there are plenty of people in Eve that still enjoy it as it is. What is needed is a way to get THOSE players (the ones who enjoy casually plugging away at belts) into nullsec. The way to do this is to make it so that the high end ores that are in nullsec are only realistically obtainable by those who truly enjoy mining, such that seasoned miners should be a recruiting goal. So, how do you ensure that anyone CAN get a given ore, but only the GOOD miners get enough to make it worthwhile? It goes back to my composite asteroid ideas from... 2007? man.. that WAS a long time ago... anyways, each rock contains a mixture of ores, and the lasers pull in the mix it contains. This is skewed towards a given type by crystals. Lots of numbers and examples in my [url=http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=579110&page=3#83]posts from back then[/url]. Adding 'junk' ore to the breakdown could make the specialized miner all that more important, as without the specialized training to use the better crystals and ore scanners, one would get a LOT of junk for a littel bit of the good stuff.

The best thing is the idea really wouldn't require a LOT of coding, and the core methods of mining would remain a lot the same. Arrive at belt, initiate scan, find your good yummy rock, fit proper crystal for the goo you want, and start shooting. Not much different than today, but not something anybody with the isk for a hulk could do anywhere NEAR as good as the guys who've spent a bulk of their skillpiont in ore specialization skills.

Hemmo Paskiainen
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:13:00 - [129]
 

The mining issue involves more than mining; everything that has something to do with it;

The issue with mining is that these days u don't have to mine to get morphite, megacyte and zydrine. U simply kill a few rats or buy up for rock bottom prices mission loot and u reprocess it. On top of this u also have drone alloys. Drone mission loot and loot from drone npc'ing in drone regions is crashing mining prices. A tactic called 'Chaining NPC's' in the drone regions is very popular. U kill all spawn until u get a good triple drone bs spawn, now u kill the battleships only and keep the cruisers/frigs alive. U can keep doing that over and over and loot only specific expensive alloys. Only loot the alloys that drop the high end ores. This brings in the most isk per hour. And this is crashing high end ore mining severly.

I personally find that, if mining should be on par with other 0.0 professions the high end ores should be removed from drone alloys and NPC's should stop dropping meta 1-3 loot. Or adjust the ore that reprocessing gives. This gives 2 problems, 1 is what alloys should drop to compensate the high end ore loss? and where should meta items come from? A simple way is to increase lower ore drops from alloys or/and simply give drone npc's partly bounties, 50/50 (or any other % but keep on par). The meta stuff could be manufactured? Npc's could drop specific meta 1-4 decrypters. Instead of dropping ore and loot they drop T1 items (very ore low) and a xx chance on a decrypter. Something like T1 disrupter + meta 4 decrypter + manufacturing slot + (size of T1 item (5/10/25/50m3) * xxx base amount of isk) = faint warp disrupter (meta 4). This should be low skill invention.
This indirectly increases industry (manufacturing), balances mission loot value drop vs missed ore value reprocess. Adds a supply vs demand on meta stuff instead of a mission supply dump 24/7. Makes mining more worthwhile in 0.0. Personally i don't see any solution that can fix mining without removing high end ores from drone alloys.

Summary in short;
-remove high end ores from alloys, compensate the loss with isk or increased low ends compressed in alloys (compression is business too :idea: vs logistic its perfect)
-remove meta stuff from mission loot and compensate by let them chance based drop meta decrypters
-make meta stuff manufacture with decrypters

/Hemmo Paskiainen

Ned Black
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:16:00 - [130]
 

Moving ice from highsec will have HUGE impact on pretty much everyone.

Highsec poses => Pos fuel will become so expensive not to mention scarse that it will be pretty much impossible to run them. This would make T2 production very very hard if not impossible.

WH life => This is the only place you pretty much NEED to live out of a POS... not like 0.0 where a POS really is a luxuary article and the real place to be are the outposts... well, the fuel costs will become silly high here as well, which sure as hell will make prices rise.

0.0 => A lot of Poses will go dark here as well simply due to the fact that in a very short amount of time there will be huge fuel shortages. Poses burns lots of fuel. Initially the change wont be noticed that much. But in just a matter of months really the stocks of ready ice products will drop drastically. The prices will skyrocket and the amounts will not be even close to what is being used.

Glasgow Dunlop
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:46:00 - [131]
 

Ice belts should vanish altogether and be replaced with scannable grav sites in all space, I feel that to compensate this, there should also be another ice type added that is usable by all, but is a much, much lower yield due to is omnipotent properties.

WH mining should be left as is. Unlike in 0.0 whenever a nasty red/neut jumps in, the mining fleet runs to the nearest safe spot/pos, in WH space, the 1st time your likely to see an enemy ship, is when itís decloaking to pop you. Another thing as well, if sites are being run in the WH, it can take days for another grav site to spawn, rather than in null, where its farmed to perfection.




Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:30:00 - [132]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 16/08/2011 12:31:11
Originally by: Lady Ayeipsia
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.

so, you mine ICE in highsec for 32 hours in order to save 70m? Thats a terrible ISK/h income.
Why not flying missions in those 32 hours, earning 650 mil and buying fuel for 9 months?

Shin Dari
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:38:00 - [133]
 

Originally by: Hemmo Paskiainen

Summary in short;
-remove high end ores from alloys, compensate the loss with isk or increased low ends compressed in alloys (compression is business too :idea: vs logistic its perfect)
-remove meta stuff from mission loot and compensate by let them chance based drop meta decrypters
-make meta stuff manufacture with decrypters

/Hemmo Paskiainen

Interesting, as a mission player let me give you my feedback on this. I agree that miners in general should be better off. But a few things need to be considered:
1. I will be compensated.
2. I will able to continue to use dropped ammo or make my own ammo.

You seem to have the compensation part mostly down. I would support replacing meta loot with decrypters/BPCs. But the dropped ammo should be increased so that we have enough ammo or enough reprocessed minerals make the type of ammo that we use, it would also help if manufacturing T1 ammo doesn't require high end minerals.

But we should also look at bounty isk and its effect on the general economy. I won't mind assigning bounty isk to drones rats, it makes sense. However this would require the reduction of bounty isk given out for other rats.
I think that can be compensated by having wrecks drop more salvage, including a chance of intact salvage (the price of which will drop because of this). Also CCP should look at dropping other items that can't be reprocessed, such as rogue drone components.

Jack Tronic
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:01:00 - [134]
 

Edited by: Jack Tronic on 16/08/2011 13:04:30
Edited by: Jack Tronic on 16/08/2011 13:02:42
Edited by: Jack Tronic on 16/08/2011 13:02:11
Actually the comment someone made was legitimately more interesting, buff the ice belt rats in highsec to the point they are stronger than the ones in nullsec.

Quote:

Wormhole: Amount dependent upon class (higher class -> more ore) - equal amounts of everything.


It's sorta like this now, higher classes have the rarer sites that contain more ore+goodies in comparison to the **** ones that are like trit paradises and maybe 1 rock of 10000 units of Arkanor or somethin.


You know, I REALLY HOPE that CCP isn't using some sort of "gravs completed" statistics in wspace, because they probably don't realize tha tmost will be from hole control and farming the sleepers, you kill the sleepers and just let it rot for 3 days to disappear because nobody likes having the stupid gravs on scan. Alternatively you can make more isk of ffarming the sleeper spawns from multiple lol gravs and ladars than spending the next 12 hours mining.

Ceelah
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:17:00 - [135]
 

Edited by: Ceelah on 16/08/2011 13:27:09
So the idea here is to, what? Make people move out into nullsec? Rebalance the game?

The foremost problem you have, and the one CCP and the nullsec alliances seem reluctant to address, is this: Many players choose to not go to nullsec because of "Not Blue - Shoot". Nullsec can be a big pain in the ass if you're a neut, and many industrialists just don't want to play there.

One of the primary complaints seen in many threads is a lack of solo and small gang pvp. Many people go out into the nullsec black because they like to fight, and because pvp is pretty damn fun. The problem is that people who don't want to pvp will not go some place where they will get r@ped on the other side of every gate they jump through. It's a catch 22 situation: nullsec alliances want more people out in nullsec so they can shoot them, which is exactly why many people do not want to go out to nullsec.

Imagine this: What if an alliance simply allowed neutrals to go about their business inside of their sovereign regions without blowing them up? You think you might see better revenues if you protected your neutrals instead of hunting them? You'll never know unless you try and, candidly, it's just waaay more fun to r@pe them so why bother.

Many industrialists do not want to have to join an alliance and pay huge alliance taxes and fees for the benefit of mining in space and building stuff. Not everyone wants to work for someone else. There is a significant portion of the EVE community that likes to run a solo corp. These people enjoy logging on, checking the wallet, and seeing if there is a way to make more ISK without the hassle of having to go out and blow anything up. Not the most exciting gamestyle, but a legitimate one that they pay a monthly subscription for. Remove Ice and rebalance minerals out into nullsec and you are essentially eliminating these people from the game. Again, from a pvp plystyle that's no big deal, but from a subscriber standpoint you've just taken away a means of enjoying the game that carebears (Rolling Eyes) pay for.

Let's say you do move to a "risk v. reward" model and move all high value materials out into nullsec. How do you plan to stop the overwhelming number of bots (especially the ones in the Russian player controlled nullsec regions) from over running the game? As it stands now you have one real life ethnic group controlling a huge portion of nullsec. Whether you want to admit it or not, the deeper areas of those regions are bot havens where mining and hauling is an automated machine. How do you plan to offset the exploits in these areas. CCP doesn't seem to be too concerned about it now. What about when the game economy shifts because those bots are now the overwhelming supplier of Ice (or whatever)?

My .02 is this: Forget about rebalancing minerals and "risk v. reward". Focus instead on eliminating the bot nuisance, create new outer rim systems and expand nullsec. Eliminate losec (which is just a wasted and unused free for all), and expand hisec out into half of the old losec. Create a mechanic where Alliances can automatically collect transaction taxes from individual players and non alliance corporations in exchange for an automated standing system that makes neuts blue so long as they agree to the automated tax that is capped at 10%. Have blues protected from blue aggression using the Concord system in place in hisec. Non tax consenting neuts and reds are, of course, on their own and not subject to Concord action. Pirates and griefers could carry on as usual. Now you have a situation where alliances have to protect their tax paying neuts / blues from roaming gangs and reds. That means active patrols on Sov space frontiers, and active pvp for people who make it their business to keep their space safe. Neuts benefit by having access to nullsec without signing up for alliance slavery.

Death to all bots in space.

Cuhlen
Tower of Ravens
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:26:00 - [136]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

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.



Greyscale, you are completely wrong here. I implore you to get together with folks who actually live in wormholes and talk to them about mining before you start making statements like this because you clearly do not know what you are talking about here. Wormhole space is nerfed enough as it is. Mining is hardly safe in wspace (no local!), has at best a 75% yield, and is 1 thing of a few things that you can do in wspace.


Originally by: CCP Greyscale

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.



Seriously? DUDE - GET RID OF THE BOTTERS! Wormhole space has little to nothing to do with the depression of mineral prices.

Mining adds alot to 'the overall ecosystem' of wspace too. How is it that wspace is less important than 0.0? How is it that in 0.0, where you can improve your space, mining is less lucrative? Maybe you should consider addressing problems with 0.0, and quit looking elsewhere for a solution.

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

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.



Again, you make statements without knowing the facts, either that or you are intentionally blowing this way out of proportion. The ABC rocks in C2s are tiny. Maybe if you are mining in a rifter you might be able to mine crokite all day in a C2, but not otherwise. Also, you do realize that grav sites are transient, right? You might go a week or more without having a grav site in your system. Sure, you can go to a connected system, but that adds exponentially to the risk. wspace is hardly a safe haven for miners.

Why is it that wormhole dwellers should only get to be 'a bit self-sufficient'? 'smallish amounts of high-ends'? Again - WHY? If your goal is really to improve the depression of mineral prices, then again, get rid of the macro miners.

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

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.


That's just brilliant. And what do those miners do when there is no one on to clear sites for them? I guess they can go back to spinning ships...







Cuhlen
Tower of Ravens
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:54:00 - [137]
 

Edited by: Cuhlen on 16/08/2011 13:57:01
You want to make mining in 0.0 more lucrative, and you want to bring more miners to 0.0. Ok, those are nice goals to have, but they are not realistic ones. You will probably -never- achieve those goals unless you do something silly like make mining ships in 0.0 invulnerable to pvp or remove all ores/ice from HS and WSpace.

Ask yourselves this: Why do miners avoid 0.0? I assure you it is not because 0.0 mining is not lucrative. There are a load of reasons, 0.0 reasons, why mining is generally avoided in 0.0 (except by botters in controlled alliance systems).

First and foremost is that miners/industrialists are not really considered 'first class citizens' of 0.0 alliances. They are not pvprs for the most part, and so their contributions to the alliance are considered to be less than the contributions of folk who can defend the alliance space. Right or wrong, this generally seems to be the case.

Mining in 0.0 is a risky business. The space is too hard for entry-level miners to control/defend. If you do not have a large alliance actively defending the mining sites, (and letting miners mine!), then miners are just sitting ducks in 0.0

Have you thought at all about why there are no real 'mining/industrial alliances' in 0.0? 0.0 is too hotly contested and too hard to keep sov for anything but serious pvpers. Mining corps/alliances simply cannot hold onto their space on their own, so instead they have to 'rent' space like they were some kind of serf, 'leasing' a lords land.

0.0 rats in grav sites are too hard for miners to tank.

.... These and other 0.0 specific reasons are why 0.0 is not pulling in more miners. It has nothing to do with mineral prices or wormholes or the availability of ores/ice in HS, and everything to do with the nature of 0.0. To make substantive changes to mining in 0.0, you are going to have to drastically change the nature of the environment.





E man Industries
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:03:00 - [138]
 

As an addition to this.

Minning should be avaialbe in a variety of forms.
A newer player can not mine in 0.0 without a faction tanked hulk or a battle ship. Also fleets have no real benifit over many solo miners simply all in a fleet but seperated(for boosts).

Would like to see a wider range of grav sites. Some where a retriever could mine some. this would contain less high end ores than belts so obvously belts are better but a new player can mine..

Also something to add an insentive to mine together. Maybe a site with harder rats that keep spawning and you need to mine before you are overwhelmed..or maybe short timed high value sites you want to mine fast before they disapear.

Kendra Wilkinson
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:23:00 - [139]
 

about ice belt, does i understand that i've skill an alt maxed for orca and leadership for nothing?

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.16 15:26:00 - [140]
 

Edited by: CCP Greyscale on 16/08/2011 15:28:53
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
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.

At the CSM summit, CCP did not have any metrics regarding mining high-ends in WH-space and their export to the rest of the game, nor has any subsequently been disclosed to the CSM.

Lacking metrics that show significant outflows of high-ends into the greater economy, there is no justification for nerfing it in WH-space for philosophical reasons. While WH space may not "need" it as a reward type, WH residents need it as a resource for local consumption. WH import and export is already tough enough without adding a whole class of materials that must be laboriously imported. We can't just jump-freighter it in, after all.

If CCP does have credible metrics that show that WH-sourced ABC is distorting the EVE economy (as opposed to being locally consumed), then by all means show this to the CSM. I for one will be happy to report to the community whether or not the quantities are significant.


Originally by: CCP Greyscale
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.



Originally by: Cuhlen
Greyscale, you are completely wrong here. I implore you to get together with folks who actually live in wormholes and talk to them about mining before you start making statements like this because you clearly do not know what you are talking about here. Wormhole space is nerfed enough as it is. Mining is hardly safe in wspace (no local!), has at best a 75% yield, and is 1 thing of a few things that you can do in wspace.


Part of the reason for doing this kind of feedback round is to get precisely this sort of info Smile If you know of some knowledgeable WH types who can give a clear explanation of their perspective on this stuff, then seriously please ask them to come post here. Clear, reasoned perspectives on things are hugely valuable resources for us.

Mr Kidd
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:41:00 - [141]
 

What about wormhole POS's and ice mining? Assuming ice is removed from hisec, you're now saying if we have members who ice mine to keep the POS's running we'll have to keep a separate presence in both w-space and nullsec? So, if I wanted to keep everything under one corp I'd have to hold nullsec space and pay the RMT overlords and maintain my w-space presence. For small corps this is impossible.

IDK, looks like CCP is wanting to create yet another lucrative bottleneck for nullsec. POS's exist in all forms of space, not just nullsec. Even if hisec is given just enough to meet demand, what about w-space?

Your null-centric view is quite disturbing.

Hadriel3
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:48:00 - [142]
 

Edited by: Hadriel3 on 16/08/2011 15:50:33
Ok, I'll bite...

I've been living in a c2 for 9 months now, and I have probably spent about 3-4 hours total over the past 9 months mining. My Corp will do ANYTHING else before we settle down to mine, it's one of the least profitable things you can do in w-space (aside from the low end gas sites). That being said though, it is great for when we don't have enough people online to go run sites or look for PVP.

Addressing Risk vs. Reward:
I firmly believe that w-space is one of the most dangerous places to mine, check our killboard to see how many barges / exhumers my Corp has killed. We even caught an orca in a site once, it wasn't easy since you have to combat probe them before you can find them, but we were able to do it.
It worries me that I have now seen removing high end ore from wormholes mentioned by CCP twice in the last month for completely asinine reasons... When someone mentions taking a hulk into a c1 you know they are talking out of their ass (hulks don't fit through c1 wormholes). And lower class wormholes with a direct connection to k-space are actually MORE dangerous than the higher class ones. The reason is that people love scanning into those holes for easy ganks (like mining ships).

Addressing abundance:
The amount of high end ore that spawns in w-space every day is negligible compared to what spawns in nullsec. An average c2 site will yield between 3000 and 9000 units of arkonor, that's it. Also this mechanic is already easily tune-able by making the gravimetric sites spawn less...

In conclusion, taking such a ham-handed approach as this to address a problem that may or may not exist just seems incredibly shortsighted to me. Please think before you act (and speak) CCP Greyscale.

Learath
Posted - 2011.08.16 15:49:00 - [143]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Edited by: CCP Greyscale on 16/08/2011 15:28:53
Part of the reason for doing this kind of feedback round is to get precisely this sort of info Smile If you know of some knowledgeable WH types who can give a clear explanation of their perspective on this stuff, then seriously please ask them to come post here. Clear, reasoned perspectives on things are hugely valuable resources for us.

If you're really interested in feedback, here's my position. I lived exclusively (as possible) in a WH for 6-12 months, on and off since. We started with a small tower, in a c2. Profit per hour was ladar > mag > other combat > grav. We got somewhere around 1grav/week on average in the c2, with 5-10k Ark. The grav sites were distributed very randomly though, so we could easily have no grav for 3 weeks straight, or as many as 3 at one time. The risk was high enough that we strongly recommended against using Hulks, instead using covetors, with Orcas in pos bubble giving boost. The vast majority of the ore was crushed locally, at great expense (4000 cpu, 3 hours per run, 200k m3 per run which is *tiny* for ore, only 12.5k ark) and horrible efficiency (75% with perfect skills). Those who could afford a rorqual could do much better with ore compression, but that's still a huge risk. After the first 6 months a griefer alliance put something like 40 bb with support in the hole, and crushed us, killing off 3 or so large towers before we could evac. This is a pretty common occurrence in WH space, somebody will get their panties in a wad and bring in whatever it takes. The holes directly connected to HS are most vulnerable, but no hole is really safe, and tracking down a half competent covops scout is nearly impossible.

TLDR: All WH operation is high risk. WH mining is moderate reward.

Edward Harris
Blue Sun Enterprises
Blue Moon Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 16:24:00 - [144]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Ok, so here's the thing about wormhole space: it doesn't need mining as a reward type. [..] The only thing it's really achieving is giving people a pretty safe place to mine high-ends and make a lot of money.



Let me get this straight - You are telling us you consider mining in Wormspace "safe"?

I don't mean to be rude here, but have you ever been in a wormhole? Do you know what actually happens to miners in a nullsec without local?

Doctor Invictus
Gallente
Industry and Investments
Posted - 2011.08.16 16:39:00 - [145]
 

As per the most up-to-date version of my nullsec proposal...

Belt Rarification

Instead of having belts with mixed content based on sec status, each belt would contain a single type of ore (e.g., 'veldspar belt', 'arkanor belt', etc). Sovereignty holders could upgrade the contents and yields of the belts in systems they hold, based on a revised index system. Essentially, they can customize their space based on the level of activity they can maintain. Each belt upgrade has an upfront and maintenance costs in terms of upgrade credits (generated by in-system activity).

River Tem
Posted - 2011.08.16 16:40:00 - [146]
 

Edited by: River Tem on 16/08/2011 17:56:52
I can not agree with removing ice entirely from HighSec.
Better to slow re-spawn rates of ice down visibly making Concords protection of it's havesting worth declaring war over.

It will be hard on independent miners like myself and will likely cause some herding behaviour as we struggle to adjust to to a new era of austerity but that's what the harsh reality of EVE is all about right?

DO NOT tinker with ship module mechs or mining rates. You can not change the laws of physics jim. or in your case, you should not.

protecting pos fuel sources should be a priority for moon harvesting alliances. make the ice mining profession come into demand as it always should have been.

Please consider introducing storyline missions and live events explaining the mech changes you design to implement!

Arushia
Nova Labs
New Eden Research.
Posted - 2011.08.16 17:26:00 - [147]
 

I think the removal of all ice from high-sec would be premature. The isk/hr is already poor compared to the better high-sec ores. As others have pointed out, the 0.0 ices have a measly 10% advantage over high-sec ice. This should probably be boosted to at least a 50% increase, if not a 100% increase.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.08.16 17:31:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Part of the reason for doing this kind of feedback round is to get precisely this sort of info Smile If you know of some knowledgeable WH types who can give a clear explanation of their perspective on this stuff, then seriously please ask them to come post here. Clear, reasoned perspectives on things are hugely valuable resources for us.


I consider myself a knowledgeable WH type. I don't mine, because it's incredibly tedious and extremely dangerous, but I do kill people who mine. I'm not going to comment on the risks of mining in WHs vs. 0.0, except to say "lol local, complete safety, bot heaven".

Mining is the most dangerous and least rewarding profession in a WH, as defined by profits/hr and risk of getting ganked/hr. Because of this, people only mine when there is absolutely nothing else to do, or because they're stupid. Your data may show all these grav/ladar sites getting spawned, but this is because they are getting activated by people who want to clear these worthless sigs and stop them cluttering up their WH. In contrast, valuable radar/magneto sites will not be spawned until they are ready to be run, because of the three-day timer.

In a combat site, a player killing Sleepers can keep aligned and switch sites as he finishes them, every few minutes. As such, it is harder for him to be tackled. Only yesterday I was unable to kill a Tengu in a Sleeper site because it was aligned and I could not get into position to bump him off alignment before he finished the site and left. Even when tackled, your average combat ship has a fairly solid tank and there is time for backup to come in.

Miners have none of this. They are stuck stationary at the same site for much longer, at sites which are generally much easier to probe out then radar/magneto sites. They cannot stay aligned, and the fatarsed barges cannot warp out in time. Jetcan mining gives a handy WTM target for sensible attackers who warp in at range. They are literally, well, metaphorically, sitting ducks. The most dangerous WH systems of all to mine in are those C1, C2 & C3 systems with direct links to highsec, close to high-population trade hubs such as Jita, as these systems see the greatest number of jump-ins per hour, of people looking for stupid, vulnerable miners to gank.

You're barking up the wrong tree here. That is all.

Cuhlen
Tower of Ravens
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2011.08.16 17:54:00 - [149]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Part of the reason for doing this kind of feedback round is to get precisely this sort of info Smile If you know of some knowledgeable WH types who can give a clear explanation of their perspective on this stuff, then seriously please ask them to come post here. Clear, reasoned perspectives on things are hugely valuable resources for us.


Ok - while I'm not much of a miner, I am a director of one of the longer running wormhole alliances. I have lived in a C6 wormhole for over 18 months, and know a bit about them.

Here is what I can tell you based on the makeup of our alliance.

Mining in the low-class (c1-c3) wormholes is hardly worth the risk. Even though you may find abc ores here, the total amount in these grav sites is trivial, 10-15k/ore usually.

C5 and C6 wormholes occasionally spawn core grav sites, these are where you'll find large amounts of abc ore in the fields, though the most merc you'll find is 15000 in any given field. This may seems like a lot of ore, but keep in mind that it does not regenerate every day like kspace belts do.

While grav sites are common in wh space, the rare sites are, well... rare. A given system may go weeks without seeing one.

The sites are usually active for 3-5 days and do not respawn in the traditional sense of the word, though any wormhole may randomly spawn a grav site or 3.

For our alliance, mining is a an on again off again past time. Most members who mine do so as a way of earning isk when there is nothing better to do. Since we do not run sleeper sites 24/7, mining and gas harvesting are one way that members keep from getting too bored in the WH.

Without a rorqual, our members would either have to haul all of that ore out to HS (too many trips to make this viable, at least without using a freighter - and HS exits are too precious to waste that way), or use the intensive refining array, which has only a 75% efficiency.

Since you cannot get capitals into wormholes smaller than a c4, many folk build them inside their system. I have seen carriers, rorquals and orcas in C1s. This is where alot of the minerals go.

isk/hr: wormholes do not change the isk/hr ratio -vs- 0.0, but they do add a lot of logistical overhead and it cannot be done 24/7. Generally, people mine in wormholes NOT to make isk, but either to build something or to keep busy. If you are coming to WHs to make isk, you spend your time running sleeper sites. Oh, I'm sure some HS folk come in every now and then, maybe even setup a tower for a while, but most folk who have spent alot of time in wormholes dont live in them. It takes a special breed, so to speak - because it takes effort to keep busy all the time. You cant just login, get a mission or find some pvp target and be off, you have to work at it. So for most, wormholes are not a mining playground for abc ores.

safety: miners and gas harvesters are easy pickings in wormholes. With no local, all they can use is dscan, which is beatable. Any competent scanner will find these ships without their probes showing up on dscan for more than a few seconds, if they dont already have the sites bookmarked.

ice: If ice is removed from HS, or seriously diminished, that is going to drive the cost of ice products through the roof. One of the problems with living out of a POS is corp member security for ships and personal property. If fuel gets much more expensive, that will force smaller corps and individuals to shut down their POSs and share with larger groups, which will increase corp theft, decrease tower defenses (due to having more SMAs and CHs) and ultimately make wormhole life even more tiresome.

Since it is difficult to setup a large scale, long-term mining operation in wspace, even for large groups (fields run out/despawn, random distribution, security, etc), I just don't see wspace mining as a serious threat to mineral prices.


Windjammer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 17:54:00 - [150]
 

Edited by: Windjammer on 16/08/2011 18:03:24
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Part of the reason for doing this kind of feedback round is to get precisely this sort of info Smile If you know of some knowledgeable WH types who can give a clear explanation of their perspective on this stuff, then seriously please ask them to come post here. Clear, reasoned perspectives on things are hugely valuable resources for us.
Itís great that you want the feedback and pay attention to it. What is deeply disturbing is the implication that you have no metrics/data/numbers to back up your proposals for mining. The usual course of action in design is to first accumulate data and input, then, and only then, present a suggested course of action for refinement through feedback from the community at large.

Based upon the available evidence it appears you (CCP) have relied upon input from a small section of EVEís society with a narrow self-interest to formulate your whiteboard outline. Are you seriously saying you havenít done any more research on this than that? Do you actually think the CSM represents all the players of EVE? This boggles the mind. Why would you do this?

I know that youíre asking for feedback from the players, but you have to know that the forums are not someplace the majority of your customers frequent. Geez, there are a lot of customers who donít even know the CSM exists. You have tools at your disposal to poll your entire active customer list. Presumably you have tools available to you to enable data extraction regarding economic flow. Your very best tool is Dr. E. Use him!! And for the love of whatever, stop making statements regarding economics when you donít have any metrics to support them.

WH dwellers do not feel that your current plan to remove or reduce ABC ores in WHís is based upon accurate information. However, they are willing to listen to evidence to the contrary as long as it isnít mere speculation from people that apparently donít even have any sort of experience in WHís.

Trebor asked for data, hard numbers, and instead you glad handed him by asking for anecdotal evidence from WH dwellers. That sort of input is nice, but no substitute for unbiased, objective data. Nobody in this game has access to the overall picture in this game except you guys at CCP. Youíre the ones with the God Mode views. Use them and again, use Doc. E.

-Windjammer


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 https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only