These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New Mining Mechanics: Multi Ore, Multi Methods

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#101 - 2014-05-23 10:26:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

People rarely change the extractor heads in PI more often than once a day because it is tedious. There is no way to do something simple more often than this that wouldn't drive someone insane in minutes I think! As someone pointed out in a separate but remarkably similar thread if miners wanted more gameplay and interaction they would be in losec or null mining. Then other players would bring the gameplay to them.

Well, I don't think it's a right comparison. PI designed to be as much AFK as possible from the birth. It happens on some distant planet and doesn't require for you to always be at the spot. But mining is much much more active by design. In lows/nulls It actually requires that you stay always at the monitor and constantly remain vigilant. So those minigames and such much more belongs here, than to PI. And even with other players it still could be a little bit intresting and rewarding for its fans than that. There is nothing wrong with it, the game should evolve in end user experience too, not only relying on those old concepts "here is a crap mechanics and wait for some PvPer to make it a little bit funnier". Just take out a "crap mechanics" part and leave "PvPer" at place, and it's now much better. And those who want to do it old style still can - OP integrated this approach into his proposal.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2014-05-23 10:35:44 UTC
The problem would be that as pointed out by others in numerous similar threads anything that makes the job of gaining a good yield from mining more involved will benefit the botters more. If it pays enough then the botters will develop a bot capable of exploiting the new mechanism. Too involved and the botters benefit more as players simply won't bother as they mine for a relaxing low attention isk generation mechanism.

I'm fine with improvements to gameplay but don't think that this would be and would just irritate the real miners who have no interest in such minigames. And in the OP's suggestion if the players who don't want to minigame don't do so they will have a lower isk yield as the ore they gather would be worth less per m3. They would effectively be forced to play the new mechanism to maintain yield.

Enhanced gameplay should be from the other ideas such as non-scannable anomolies, CONCORD as a career, Distress Calls etc rather than amending areas that currently work fine (in my opinion of course ).
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#103 - 2014-05-23 10:36:49 UTC
If you think tedious is always unpopular check out Cookie Clicker and the games it spawned.

As for the 'tediousness' of the proposed mechanics: Strip Mining is about as tedious as ice mining, Deposit Mining is about as tedious as current mining and Vein Mining is about as tedious as mining only the highest quality version of a specific ore in every belt and going from belt to belt.

Setting the mining lasers on the deposits is not comparable to PI, considering you will only have three at max and the position need only be changed when the deposit is depleted.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#104 - 2014-05-23 10:44:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
The problem would be that as pointed out by others in numerous similar threads anything that makes the job of gaining a good yield from mining more involved will benefit the botters more. If it pays enough then the botters will develop a bot capable of exploiting the new mechanism. Too involved and the botters benefit more as players simply won't bother as they mine for a relaxing low attention isk generation mechanism.

Are there some bots for PI, then? And from outlines I specified on previous page you can see there is a way to morph these new mechanics to some kind of "PI on steroids". For those, who are intrested in additional yields, of course. Do you think it still will be easly scriptable?
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Enhanced gameplay should be from the other ideas such as non-scannable anomolies, CONCORD as a career, Distress Calls etc rather than amending areas that currently work fine (in my opinion of course ).

Proposals I've seen regarding those changes are even more intrusive in terms of game's core principles. First of all by creating some battleground-like environments which are usually disliked by many eve players.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2014-05-23 21:11:43 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
The problem would be that as pointed out by others in numerous similar threads anything that makes the job of gaining a good yield from mining more involved will benefit the botters more. If it pays enough then the botters will develop a bot capable of exploiting the new mechanism. Too involved and the botters benefit more as players simply won't bother as they mine for a relaxing low attention isk generation mechanism.

I'm fine with improvements to gameplay but don't think that this would be and would just irritate the real miners who have no interest in such minigames. And in the OP's suggestion if the players who don't want to minigame don't do so they will have a lower isk yield as the ore they gather would be worth less per m3. They would effectively be forced to play the new mechanism to maintain yield.

Enhanced gameplay should be from the other ideas such as non-scannable anomolies, CONCORD as a career, Distress Calls etc rather than amending areas that currently work fine (in my opinion of course ).

Do PI bots exist? I was totally unaware of that... Though i guess the reason is because it's not very necessary. It runs itself anyways. So to be honest, i'm not sure if it's possible to write a bot program for these mechanics. Do you know anything about this?

Who said anything about making Strip Mining any less valuable than it is now? People can still mine the boring way with his system. But now they would still have the option to mine better with effort. Lets think about this for a minute. How will this change affect different type of miners?

1) Solo miner: has greater game play potential and greater isk generation potential by increasing his effort.
2) Minor multiple account miner(2-4 accounts) Has the ability to increase the efficiency of one of his miners while the rest remain the same as before. Will increase their game play potential and slightly enahnce their isk generation potential.
3) Major multiple account miner(5+ accounts) With the increased effort of controlling multiple accounts, there's a much lower likelihood of them being able to capitalize on this mechanic. They won't see much of a change to anything accept not having to move around as much with the increased size of asteroids.
4) Bots.... Depending on the ability of someone to create a bot for this, they are either not impacted or are able to utilize this system to a much greater extent than a human can. Though if that were to happen it would be a pretty big red flag for someone to come an inspect. Especially if there are more than one of them in the same location running much higher efficiency than average. So they'd likely be restricted in some way anyways.

I completely disagree with the gameplays you suggested. Those ideas are pretty silly and lack content.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#106 - 2014-05-23 21:54:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Abrazzar wrote:


Setting the mining lasers on the deposits is not comparable to PI, considering you will only have three at max and the position need only be changed when the deposit is depleted.


So...every x minutes a miner would get to move up to three extractor head to another position/asteroid? I bet they just can't wait to be enthralled by that...

As for the responses about PI bots I said based on others comments (from those who seemed to know more about botting than I do since it's an activity I would never bother with). However unless the gameplay is fairly involved it shouldn't be too difficult for a competent programmer to bot it. If you make the 'gameplay' that involved it'll become very tedious for the miner.

Most miners like mining the way it is. If you want active mining then you use a scanner and keep switching asteroids for the best yield. When people want mining to be less dull they take friends along and chat with each other i.e. they interact with other players. Those who don't want to just get on with it and if they are afk they are risking their ship in return for rewards in ore. Right now mining is fairly balanced and straightforward. Why spend time complicating something that isn't broken instead of fixing things that are?
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#107 - 2014-05-24 00:52:53 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
[quote=Abrazzar]Why spend time complicating something that isn't broken instead of fixing things that are?


I can't speak for anyone else in this thread, but I want to see more emphasis on the risk/reward aspects of mining, and some mechanical changes to allow more types of mining could open up opportunities for that.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#108 - 2014-05-24 04:04:03 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Most miners like mining the way it is. If you want active mining then you use a scanner and keep switching asteroids for the best yield. When people want mining to be less dull they take friends along and chat with each other i.e. they interact with other players. Those who don't want to just get on with it and if they are afk they are risking their ship in return for rewards in ore. Right now mining is fairly balanced and straightforward. Why spend time complicating something that isn't broken instead of fixing things that are?

Are you really sure most miners like mining the way it is? Or do we just suffer it as a steady income? I know how i feel about it.

Are you a miner?

Judging by your 2nd and 3rd sentences I'm going to assume you're not. "Best yield by switching asteroids" lol, how silly can you get? One of CCP's more recent goals is to make sure all game features have "actual Content". Would you really consider mining the way it is now content?

Mining is broken. Mining is not content. It's just a means to an end. It would be amazing if they would add content to mining.

And i'm really not sure what you're arguing against here. The idea doesn't take anything away at all, it just adds content. Nobody will lose anything with this idea.
Mos7Wan7ed
Hardcore Industries
#109 - 2014-05-24 05:15:02 UTC
too many ideas for one proposal.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2014-05-24 09:13:45 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

Are you a miner?

Yes

Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Judging by your 2nd and 3rd sentences I'm going to assume you're not.


Assumptions can be bad can't they?

Erutpar Ambient wrote:
"Best yield by switching asteroids" lol, how silly can you get? One of CCP's more recent goals is to make sure all game features have "actual Content". Would you really consider mining the way it is now content?

Mining is broken. Mining is not content. It's just a means to an end. It would be amazing if they would add content to mining.

And i'm really not sure what you're arguing against here. The idea doesn't take anything away at all, it just adds content. Nobody will lose anything with this idea.


You monitor the asteroid contents to make sure you don't waste cycles on nearly empty roids, you pick the highest value asteroids first, if ice mining you switch to a larger asteroid if many lasers hit the same roid you are mining and you suspect you want complete the next cycle. It's called active mining, i.e. not afk, i.e how a miner atk gets better yield than a bot that blindly mines each roid in turn.

The proposed changes would reduce the income for a standard miner as the miners taking the best ores get more minerals, but those poor sods would be running some mini-game type interaction of some kind probably 4-6 times an hour? Please...that would be like running the level I mining missions 4-6 times an hour. Making people run mini-games is not content, it is a not-so-stealth suggestion against afk mining. I don't care if people afk mine, that's their choice and if they get hit by the CODE people they take the loss.

Currently atk miners make more than an afk miner through the existing mechanisms. Want greater risk/reward? go mine in losec/null then. Or gas harvest in WH's. Want more interaction? try chatting with the miners around you. Bothered about bots? don't escalate things into a virtual arms race between bot designers and players then, just leave CCP to it.
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2014-05-24 10:29:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

You monitor the asteroid contents to make sure you don't waste cycles on nearly empty roids, you pick the highest value asteroids first, if ice mining you switch to a larger asteroid if many lasers hit the same roid you are mining and you suspect you want complete the next cycle

C'mon, some casual games my mom plays offer more "rich" gameplay than this.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Currently atk miners make more than an afk miner through the existing mechanisms. Want greater risk/reward? go mine in losec/null then. Or gas harvest in WH's. Want more interaction? try chatting with the miners around you. Bothered about bots? don't escalate things into a virtual arms race between bot designers and players then, just leave CCP to it.

So it's an old good talk "Lets leave old oversimplistic mechanics straight out of 2003 in place and try to somehow have fun from out of the game things while playing it, or find solace in tag games with some PvPers out there (if they will show up). The game doesn't need to get better and evolve in end user's everyday experinece (like new, not-so-crappy PvE, out-of-pod experience, etc).. well not untill this new stuff is some new [useless] ship hulls we have plenty of already"

Totally disagree. The game still has to offer some mechanics that at least involve playing it, and not only for combat/PvP part of it. If I wished to have fun in chatting, I probably would launched irc/jabber client, not Eve.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#112 - 2014-05-24 11:29:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
I'm all for change and regularly propose/support changes. Any change that benefits active miners would benefit me but the OP's proposed change wouldn't in my opinion give me any better gameplay. I don't run missions as the repetitive nature bores me. This idea would drive me nuts after the first few times...
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#113 - 2014-05-24 12:23:52 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
I'm all for change and regularly propose/support changes. Any change that benefits active miners would benefit me but the OP's proposed change wouldn't in my opinion give me any better gameplay. I don't run missions as the repetitive nature bores me. This idea would drive me nuts after the first few times...

I am pretty sure by now that you have no idea what I am describing and base your opinions of it on superficial assumptions. Also, you haven't added any alternative idea or any proposal for improvement. You have added nothing of substance to this thread thus far.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2014-05-24 12:50:17 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
I'm all for change and regularly propose/support changes. Any change that benefits active miners would benefit me but the OP's proposed change wouldn't in my opinion give me any better gameplay. I don't run missions as the repetitive nature bores me. This idea would drive me nuts after the first few times...

I am pretty sure by now that you have no idea what I am describing and base your opinions of it on superficial assumptions. Also, you haven't added any alternative idea or any proposal for improvement. You have added nothing of substance to this thread thus far.


You are proposing an additional mechanism on top of standard stripmining. This mechanism would in some way be a kind of minigame. This minigame would be repeated on a regular basis dependant on how long these veins of ore last for.

I haven't added an alternative as the altrnative already exists. Mine in losec or null. The new changes to exhumers and the new prospector may allow for this to bd more viable but e'll have to see once they are released.

I'm not against changes at all and the change you propose would benefit me but i don't suppott changes based on whether i benefit as that would be purely selfish. I am contributing to the discussion by raising concerns. If you persuade me that they are unfounded then i will support. So far the proposal looks awfully like adding a mini game of a very repetitive nature which i can't support.
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2014-05-24 13:15:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

I haven't added an alternative as the altrnative already exists. Mine in losec or null. The new changes to exhumers and the new prospector may allow for this to bd more viable but e'll have to see once they are released.

It solves nothing. It even makes end user's experience more awfull. Now you do not only have to attend to boring and no-brain-required type of gameplay, but additionally you have to be atk all the time to stay alive, what intensifies the torture. Mining gameplay is a crap, pve is a crap, and they have to be changed on the game mechanics level, just for the sake of change, just to make them more fun to play regardless of whether you do it in a free pvp zone or not. Why do you have to endure this brain numbing (but neccessary!) activities just because some guy hasn't shown up today in your local? Just because no one here to threat you in nulls you are deemed to spend your day doing a simplistic, unbearably boring repetative job and still staying atk all the time? This is a solid game design, as you see it? These falsy rethorics contribute nothing.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#116 - 2014-05-24 13:27:56 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Abrazzar wrote:
I am pretty sure by now that you have no idea what I am describing and base your opinions of it on superficial assumptions. Also, you haven't added any alternative idea or any proposal for improvement. You have added nothing of substance to this thread thus far.

You are proposing an additional mechanism on top of standard stripmining. This mechanism would in some way be a kind of minigame. This minigame would be repeated on a regular basis dependant on how long these veins of ore last for.

Thank you for proving my point.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#117 - 2014-05-24 16:55:08 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Abrazzar wrote:
I am pretty sure by now that you have no idea what I am describing and base your opinions of it on superficial assumptions. Also, you haven't added any alternative idea or any proposal for improvement. You have added nothing of substance to this thread thus far.

You are proposing an additional mechanism on top of standard stripmining. This mechanism would in some way be a kind of minigame. This minigame would be repeated on a regular basis dependant on how long these veins of ore last for.

Thank you for proving my point.


Well, to be fair, your original post was a little unclear about the specifics of how Deposit Mining would work, and if he's only read that and the last page or two, I can see why he would get confused. Doesn't really excuse his lack of effort though.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2014-05-24 19:42:59 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
So far the proposal looks awfully like adding a mini game of a very repetitive nature which i can't support.

By your logic, probing and PI are mini-games.

I don't disagree with you there, but I think this "mini-game" isn't the four letter word you seem to think it is.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-05-24 20:45:39 UTC
Erk...humble pie time! I had indeed mixed this up with another idea...

I have re-read the original post again and some of the proposals (gas clouds, damage fields, wider spread of asteroids) match with the comet mining proposal someone else made that I did support. I still think the vein mining etc would get old pretty quickly in the same way as the explo hacking considering how much more often the miner would need to do it. The more active elements could work well though.

I would still be concerned about the amount of work needed to implement a change to the whole of mining but this could be another addition to losec and ideal for the prospector if implemented in the active asteroid field/comet mining style.

So a yes to actively finding the fields, multiple materials to gather (gas, ore, maybe even moongoo) and having to maneuvre for optimal reward, but I'd still be against adding mini-game style elements too. For it to be better gameplay I think it would need to be more mobile, faster paced. If introduced in a seperate set of fields it could be amended/backed out too
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2014-05-24 20:48:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
So far the proposal looks awfully like adding a mini game of a very repetitive nature which i can't support.

By your logic, probing and PI are mini-games.

I don't disagree with you there, but I think this "mini-game" isn't the four letter word you seem to think it is.


No problem with a few mini-games, I quite like exploring. I'd be concerned about the number of times you'd need to perform the same actions. As I said most people only amend their PI setup at most once a day for this reason. I'd prefer to be actively controlling the ship rather than repeating a mini-game many many times. When exploring I run every site I find whether it's combat anom or hacking site to break up running the scan and hack mechanisms constantly to mitigate this for example.

Edit: And having re-read the original post and hastily backpeddled after realizing I'd muddled it with a different suggestion I think the proposed active orbiting changes raised in an earlier thread would be a pre-req to any kind of comet/active mining additions to allow pilots to pick there way through/around the target areas.