EVE Information Portal

I see in the devblog that you will be uninstalling all of the reprocessing rigs so that people have the option of reinstalling them. This is a good move! However since you are giving an inch I'm going to ask for a mile

Can you please uninstall all rigs on a structure that has a reprocessing rig on it? Chances are that the entire structure will be replaced by a refinery and it would be nice to be able to just reuse all of the rigs once we're done placing the new refinery. The old structure will in many cases be surplus to requirements at this point and be unanchored.

1) As a small moon/reaction corp. Income will disappear without a fleet of miners.

2) Some form of tax/percentage of moongoo taken within a specified range of the refinery would go a long way to helping small corps recoup some of the loss without a fleet. Part of the field could lie outside of that range so ninjas could still ply their trade.

3) Will Asteroid mining volume drop because they'll be busy mining what used to be automated?

4) What will be vulnerability be?

Querns even admits it. He profited in the past and now he doesn't want anyone else to profit the same way he had.

Dude, this change is like, the opposite of that... This change finally gives smaller groups a way to subvert and fight back against the large juggernauts. Little by little, bit by bit, disrupted moon mining operation by disrupted moon mining operation.

The rich, who can give protection, will become even richer. The poor are still poorer.

Many, many people have profited from passive moongoo mining. I said that because, out of everyone in the game, we have the most to lose from this change, yet we champion it anyway.

Which would kill almost everything in production...

(it's not a terrible idea!)

I don't think you understand EVE and particularly its economy very well - if at all........

Without the HS produced ships and modules going to Null (and to a somewhat lesser extent LS) - the HS Mining and Production economy would fall to pieces.

Yes - there are those 'WoW in Space' guys who would happily just run missions occasionally, given that Ratting Isk is simply printed at will - but not a great deal else.

Is it possible to have moon mineral resources depleat and respawn in other locations over an extremely slow progression.
Ie a planet will replenish x mineral over a period over time, representing the advancement of technology able to extract out of previous useless places. Ie now we are able to extract oil out of tar pits, and fracking of old wells. Also the crashing of asteroids into the moons, like PI but slow growth rates and larger deposits to mine.

Will the refineries have to scan the surface like PI to pull up sections of moon to mine?

This will keep the map in transition for the giants, and leave open space for smaller groups.
IE Goons mine out cloud ring moons completely of r16 minerals and decide to move to delve just to feed their industrial engine.
6 months later they move back cloud ring once the moons have replenished, unless the local who moved in kept the moons depleted to prevent their moons from becoming attractive.

Also can refineries be able to jump. So after 1 moon is empty it can take 1 week to prep the station to jump. This would once again allow limited nomadic life style.

Nah, you wouldn't if CCP ever were to do it properly. Any mechanical prime focus is easy to ride out, unless the feature set had a transient relation between organisational economics (taxation), demographics (activity) and subsets of geo-economics related to resource depletion/migration models (effectively introducing a non-behaviour based concept of entropy).

If CCP were ever to deviate from their historic focus on the mechanical approach (to instigating, guiding and limiting behaviour) that would be interesting. Fortunately for current organisational models they still hold on to that (yes, easy buttons to push really), so mechanisms provide boundaries and cause behaviour to follow, as opposed to the other way around (which, admittedly, would be more in line with the original emergent dynamic concept, and actually is what was directly responsible for the high retention in the first 3-4 years as well as demographics creating its own room - if I remember Oveur's old fanfest discussions correctly).

Right now it's only behaviour that provides entropy, so I can understand it when CCP says that this is sufficient. I guess I'd like it if it wasn't just that - if only because this slowly but certainly is compensated for with the exact same organisational models everywhere. I suppose in some ways this is why I can understand people (particularly those in lowsec) who don't feel fully comfortable with the current concept as presented in the devblog, because it does put them on the same paths of choice/consequence as null.

It's a case of progression paths for player organisation really, rather than a matter of resources and whether we use forks or fingers for them. In the long run it isn't healthy for a closed system like EVE to provide the same progression paths everywhere.

Don't worry about it. For whatever reasons some years ago CCP decided that developing EVE would no longer be a matter of following player behaviour pur sang, but instigating it themselves (and where not applicable inserting mechanisms based progression/choice guidance). They're not going to be as bold again as in the beginning, they don't have to. So I can't see any proper depletion/migration concept ever being introduced in such a way that you would not simply be able to sit it out as a marginal effect.