These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

How to make mining more involved!

Author
Delros
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-04-26 14:43:02 UTC
Dear CCP. Mining is sadly very boring and not very involved. I'm sure most people would like to see mining get some love in it's gameplay aspect! My suggestion is as follow.:

When a player locks an asteroid, a grid would appear on it. Similar to exploration grid but instead of being on a 2d plane, the grid would be all around the asteroid. Each node would represent a mining point. When the miner activates his mining laser. They would target a node he has selected. During his cycle, the node would start to lose structural integrity. If the player doesn't redirect his mining laser by clicking on an other node, the asteroid might crumble and all minerals would be lost.

so little recap. Grid around asteroid. You click on a node to direct you mining laser there. If you stay at a spot too long the grid would get red-is representing a weak point in structural integrity and possibility of the asteroid blowing up.

We can go further with this though. Each asteroid could have their integrity randomized.

Mining yield would be un-affected (always maxed out) if you are on top of changing nodes on that said asteroid.

This would help to reduce afk mining a lot and also make mining a lot more involved.

Of course this is just an idea. :)

Sorry I ain't too precise with the explanation.
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
#2 - 2015-04-26 16:06:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Kiddoomer
That's a pretty good idea IMO but sadly this constant gameplay will make a lot of other miner (aka isboxer) angry or sad, because if this become a thing, this could get hard to mine properly on more than 1 account at a time. And I have the feeling on these forums that isboxer miners are not a minority.
I can't tell about server performance and such though, 3D things in space in eve-online are not that easy to implement as far as I know.

Just a question regarding the idea : the asteroid could still deplete as usual once no more units are inside a roid ?

Edit : I think you should be better checking this https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=231014&find=unread , read the first post and add your idea there, because your proposal look like one of the mining method proposed,

In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen : “Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.”

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2015-04-26 16:45:52 UTC
and to what benefit? Just increasing the clicks per minute without the fun or reward going up? yeah, because all the non-afk miners just want to click more for the sake of it.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#4 - 2015-04-27 00:10:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Rawketsled
Rowells wrote:
and to what benefit? Just increasing the clicks per minute without the fun or reward going up? yeah, because all the non-afk miners just want to click more for the sake of it.

It would displace the AFK-miners, and to a lesser extent multi-boxers.

To keep roughly the same volume of mineral influx to the economy it'd have to be balanced around the idea of miners making more ISK per toon, with less toons.

To take the idea a tiny step further; only strip miner modules melt asteroids. Regular ones are too weak/whatever to damage them. It's a micro-tiericide for mining lasers instead of just training for the biggest module possible.

On an aside note, there's a mining interdiction mechanic to find here - just over-mine nodes to deny minerals to everyone else. Don't like people messing with your income? Shoot them.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#5 - 2015-04-27 01:22:11 UTC
To make this viable, you would have to at least triple mining yield per barge. Which means Hulks/Covetors would become utterly useless since they couldn't even hold one cycle of ore at that point. And Macks/Retrievers would become the only viable way to mine since they would be the only barge that wouldn't need emptying every cycle.
Why triple? Because it would be impossible to effectively multibox this, given three covetors/hulks already is a full time job to multibox if you aren't using ISBoxer to tile your windows.

And a 'minigame' window which blocks view of space is bad. This is a space game, look at the hacking minigame and see what your view of space is like...... It's not good. Minigames should take up maybe 1/8th of the screen. Yet at that point they become very simplistic since you have to allow for small screens, you can't assume everyone has mega sized triple monitor set ups.

Also you would have griefers going out and deliberately blowing up every asteroid so no-one could mine.

So sure, I'll take it if it comes with triple yield, and an increase on ore holds on EVERYTHING which has an ore hold. And if mining lasers also have to deal with it (if lesser effects). And if it doesn't totally fill my screen.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2015-04-27 04:27:06 UTC
so, basically, anyone who isnt available to have their face focused on just one screen doing the same repetitive task thousands of times a day should just not log on to EVE at all?

Sorry, but I have a day job. "minigames" stop being games when your forced to do them thousands of times, if we wanted minigames wed all be playing candy crush, not EVE.

and whats so bad about having ONE playstyle that allowed someone to play while at work, or doing school things on a second monitor, mining is semi-active playstyle for people whod rather focus on other work or chat or mumble or whatever, people who for more reasons than just multi-boxing cant devote that much attention to the game.

You want to take that away in favor of something that can ONLY be described as boring and repetitive monkey-work. This wont suddenly make people flock to mining as a "fun profession" it doesnt solve the "boring" gameplay you claim to want to fix. all it does is require people to exponentially increase the number of clicks and dedicated time on screen required for the same result, in a profession that doesnt make that much comparitively to begin with. This would drive away ALOT of people, not just multiboxing accounts, but actual people, from mining, and for many of them EVE as a whole.


TL;DR leave mining alone, it serves its gameplay purpose, if you want a more active playstyle, they exist, there are THOUSANDS of them.

(and like stated above, minigames like hacking suck because the less i can see of the screen for situational awareness, the less desire i have to make the risk, because i literally cant SEE any windows im reliant on to even know if im alone in the system let alone if they arer approaching on the d-scan i also cant see)
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2015-04-27 04:51:32 UTC  |  Edited by: 13kr1d1
Make mining lasers take damage for hauling in ore past your max hold space.

Nariya Kentaya wrote:
so, basically, anyone who isnt available to have their face focused on just one screen doing the same repetitive task thousands of times a day should just not log on to EVE at all?

Sorry, but I have a day job. "minigames" stop being games when your forced to do them thousands of times, if we wanted minigames wed all be playing candy crush, not EVE.

and whats so bad about having ONE playstyle that allowed someone to play while at work, or doing school things on a second monitor, mining is semi-active playstyle for people whod rather focus on other work or chat or mumble or whatever, people who for more reasons than just multi-boxing cant devote that much attention to the game.

You want to take that away in favor of something that can ONLY be described as boring and repetitive monkey-work. This wont suddenly make people flock to mining as a "fun profession" it doesnt solve the "boring" gameplay you claim to want to fix. all it does is require people to exponentially increase the number of clicks and dedicated time on screen required for the same result, in a profession that doesnt make that much comparitively to begin with. This would drive away ALOT of people, not just multiboxing accounts, but actual people, from mining, and for many of them EVE as a whole.


TL;DR leave mining alone, it serves its gameplay purpose, if you want a more active playstyle, they exist, there are THOUSANDS of them.

(and like stated above, minigames like hacking suck because the less i can see of the screen for situational awareness, the less desire i have to make the risk, because i literally cant SEE any windows im reliant on to even know if im alone in the system let alone if they arer approaching on the d-scan i also cant see)


- "I dont want to play minigames, I want to afk mine".
- "It doesnt matter whether you'd like mining to be more fun, Its all about me".

I want you to think bout everything people do from call of duty to WoW to pvp in EvE. Its all minigames, clicking on screen, making the STATE of the data on the screen change by clicks. What about pinball? The state of where the ball is and how long it stays on the board, and how high your "point score" is, directly correlates to more clicking (button pushing).

Games are interactive devices that output a desired result for a correct input. If you think a mining minigame is boring, thats your perogative. If you're afraid of hacking because of the risks involved, that's your perogative.

Furthermore, some people actually can't mine semi-afk because they take dangerous locations for greater rewards, or cycle their lasers onto another roid to keep the inefficiencies of overmining out.

That still takes more effort and concentration than being able to really afk mine and do something else like actual paper work, because either one or the other will suffer inefficiencies that add up, and since I can guess you'd prefer it to not be something important in real life, you really are basically afk mining, no semi about it.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices

Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#8 - 2015-04-27 04:55:32 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
so, basically, anyone who isnt available to have their face focused on just one screen doing the same repetitive task thousands of times a day should just not log on to EVE at all?

Sorry, but I have a day job. "minigames" stop being games when your forced to do them thousands of times, if we wanted minigames wed all be playing candy crush, not EVE.

and whats so bad about having ONE playstyle that allowed someone to play while at work, or doing school things on a second monitor, mining is semi-active playstyle for people whod rather focus on other work or chat or mumble or whatever, people who for more reasons than just multi-boxing cant devote that much attention to the game.

You want to take that away in favor of something that can ONLY be described as boring and repetitive monkey-work. This wont suddenly make people flock to mining as a "fun profession" it doesnt solve the "boring" gameplay you claim to want to fix. all it does is require people to exponentially increase the number of clicks and dedicated time on screen required for the same result, in a profession that doesnt make that much comparitively to begin with. This would drive away ALOT of people, not just multiboxing accounts, but actual people, from mining, and for many of them EVE as a whole.


TL;DR leave mining alone, it serves its gameplay purpose, if you want a more active playstyle, they exist, there are THOUSANDS of them.

(and like stated above, minigames like hacking suck because the less i can see of the screen for situational awareness, the less desire i have to make the risk, because i literally cant SEE any windows im reliant on to even know if im alone in the system let alone if they arer approaching on the d-scan i also cant see)

Delros wrote:
When a player locks an asteroid, a grid would appear on it. Similar to exploration grid but instead of being on a 2d plane, the grid would be all around the asteroid. Each node would represent a mining point. When the miner activates his mining laser. They would target a node he has selected. During his cycle, the node would start to lose structural integrity. If the player doesn't redirect his mining laser by clicking on an other node, the asteroid might crumble and all minerals would be lost.

Just to be clear OP, for Nariya's sake, you're proposing the grid that appears is in a big, obnoxious, window that covers your overview and your d-scan.

Delros wrote:
so little recap. Grid around asteroid. You click on a node to direct you mining laser there. If you stay at a spot too long the grid would get red-is representing a weak point in structural integrity and possibility of the asteroid blowing up.

Yep. Thanks for clarifying, a fullscreen window just like probing and PI.
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2015-04-27 05:00:05 UTC
Rowells wrote:
and to what benefit? Just increasing the clicks per minute without the fun or reward going up? yeah, because all the non-afk miners just want to click more for the sake of it.


Some day, peopel will look back on people who "play games afk" and shake their heads. Whats the point of a game you're not present for? What if we could play football "afk" from the field? That'd sure be fun, eh? More clicks is literally any game that forces you to have constant attention. More clicks is the essence of pvp. Why do you think its good for pvp and bad for pve/mining? Because you're small minded.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2015-04-27 05:03:59 UTC
Sooo....unless I play a game, that from the sounds of it is boring as heck, I'll get a lower mining output....? This will some how via internet magic make people...mine more or find something boring fun?

Have I got your proposal right?

Sorry. Nope. -1

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2015-04-27 05:09:45 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
Rowells wrote:
and to what benefit? Just increasing the clicks per minute without the fun or reward going up? yeah, because all the non-afk miners just want to click more for the sake of it.


Some day, peopel will look back on people who "play games afk" and shake their heads. Whats the point of a game you're not present for? What if we could play football "afk" from the field? That'd sure be fun, eh? More clicks is literally any game that forces you to have constant attention. More clicks is the essence of pvp. Why do you think its good for pvp and bad for pve/mining? Because you're small minded.


Pointing out the flaws in a proposal is not the same as being "pro-afk". Someday people will look back at all the illogical and dumb posts people made on the internet and shake their heads... Roll

Here let me help you out...sometimes I mine. Yeah, its boring. So much so, I often do it semi-AFK. However, in reading the OP it sounds just as boring but now I don't have the option of doing it semi-AFK, or if I do I get even worse returns.

Not.

A.

Winning.

Plan.

By all means make mining "fun" if you can. Problem is most ideas don't increase fun unless you really, really enjoyed playing pong.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#12 - 2015-04-27 05:22:37 UTC
An active mining system where the less active get a lower output is... a PVP mining system in a similar vein to market PVP. You're competing against other people [indirectly] for those ISKies.

I'm speculating here, but I think that's what multiboxers do - compete against non-boxers to get the most output.

Why shouldn't we punish those that don't work as hard?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#13 - 2015-04-27 05:50:53 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
An active mining system where the less active get a lower output is... a PVP mining system in a similar vein to market PVP. You're competing against other people [indirectly] for those ISKies.

I'm speculating here, but I think that's what multiboxers do - compete against non-boxers to get the most output.

Why shouldn't we punish those that don't work as hard?

Not sure what you are trying to say here? Other than 'Blob rules!'
Multiboxing is not 'working harder'. It's running more accounts. Working harder should be being more involved in the running of a single account. Not adding additional accounts and third party software to manage them.

However a repetitive minigame that will induce RSI is not the way to do that. Though if it came with at least tripling the mining output of a single person it would perhaps be tolerable. Since fleets of real people would become more likely to happen then as mining might compete against other professions for income.

Of course, with how small most rocks are unless we are talking about Null Industrial Anoms, you wouldn't have enough cycles for this to actually work. So you would also have to massively increase the amount of material in a rock by.... oh, 20* at least in order to make this proposal possibly work.
At which point you then have to eliminate static belts and make these all randomly appearing or regularly respawning anoms everywhere to avoid having too much ore coming from a single system.

Which may not be a bad system eliminating static belts everywhere, since we don't really need 30 belts in a single system, but would actually increase the risk to miners since there would be less locations for gankers/hunters to have to guess between to find them.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#14 - 2015-04-27 06:13:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Rawketsled
My line of thinking about multiboxing is that each account needs occasional management. Targeting new rocks, changing crystals, etc. It's trivial for one account, but non-trivial when you run 10 accounts (I'm deliberately leaving out third party software to manage them because of how close that is to input-broadcasting and botting).

If we're going to argue against a change because of RSI, then we should consider how much RSI other ISK-making activities cause.

Does this minigame introduce any more RSI than shooting little red crosses? That's not a rhetorical question. Answer it. Does the proposed minigame cause more RSI than ratting?

If it does, then so be it - don't put this change in. If it doesn't or you can't say for sure, then you're being irrationally alarmist.

Tangential to this: If running anomalies gives people Carpal Tunnel, then it's pretty hypocritical of everyone to cry about minigames ruining the wrists of miners.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2015-04-27 07:02:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Rawketsled wrote:
An active mining system where the less active get a lower output is... a PVP mining system in a similar vein to market PVP. You're competing against other people [indirectly] for those ISKies.

I'm speculating here, but I think that's what multiboxers do - compete against non-boxers to get the most output.

Why shouldn't we punish those that don't work as hard?


No it is not PvP. PvP requires another player, not a mini-game. It is just different PvE.

And you are dodging the point that it still sounds boring as ****.

Edit: To be clear, if we want to define PvP broadly we can define mining as PvP. I just hoovered up some rock some other dude can't hoover up. In this case, okay it just barely qualifies as PvP. But it is still PvP with or without the mini-game. The mini-game does nothing.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2015-04-27 07:06:57 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
My line of thinking about multiboxing is that each account needs occasional management. Targeting new rocks, changing crystals, etc. It's trivial for one account, but non-trivial when you run 10 accounts (I'm deliberately leaving out third party software to manage them because of how close that is to input-broadcasting and botting).

If we're going to argue against a change because of RSI, then we should consider how much RSI other ISK-making activities cause.

Does this minigame introduce any more RSI than shooting little red crosses? That's not a rhetorical question. Answer it. Does the proposed minigame cause more RSI than ratting?

If it does, then so be it - don't put this change in. If it doesn't or you can't say for sure, then you're being irrationally alarmist.

Tangential to this: If running anomalies gives people Carpal Tunnel, then it's pretty hypocritical of everyone to cry about minigames ruining the wrists of miners.


Look, the objection is this:

1. Boring ass mini-game.
2. Boring, yet semi-AFK play.

I'll pick 2 every time. So you'll not be making mining more fun you make it less fun. With 2 I can stream something on Netflix or watch a dvd, or even do something on another account. Playing a mini-game reminiscent of an eye-exam just sounds awful...no offense to optometrists.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
#17 - 2015-04-27 07:35:52 UTC
Like proposed in the thread I mentionned, if a new mining mechanic is added, it should not remove the actual passive one. I think it could be way better if miners would have a choice from a passive one => active one for solo / 2 miners for daily mining => cherry picking (that could be interesting for mining frigate)

Just adding a mini-game that change or don't change the yield to replace the actual mining mechanic is bad I think, because It could make go a lot of people who actually enjoy a calm activity in EVE.

In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen : “Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.”

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#18 - 2015-04-27 07:42:13 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
I'll take a boring activity that can be done semi-AFK over a boring activity that requires thousands of clicks any day of the week. The way to punish people for being semi-AFK is to kill their ships, not to make mining a fundamentally horrible activity.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Null Infinity
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2015-04-27 11:51:20 UTC
This is just another suggestion as the two, linked in my sig. I hope CCP will do something out of so many suggestion how to make active minig more rewarding, than AFK mining. I just do not think mining was intended to be so focus demanding feature from the beginning of the game. It seems to me, that it was invented as relaxing low efford low reward activity.

New mining menthods: interactive mining and comet mining

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#20 - 2015-04-27 12:32:38 UTC
As I have said in the other minimg threads I just don't see how it can be made any more interesting than it currently is. Any mini-game system would become tedious very rapidly and you have to mine for large chunks of time to gain any real reward. There is a reason that people risk lower sec space and rarely change the extractor heads more than once or twice a day...

Comet mining may work if it is high competition/risk for higher reward but that's the only idea I actively support.
12Next page