These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

CCP what happen too "Ring-Mining"??

First post
Author
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2013-01-29 14:38:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Hakaru Ishiwara
dexington wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
How many times have we heard this over the last 6 years on so many features that have just failed too happen and keep getting pushed back.
Just because someone at CCP thinks some feature/content would be cool, and have thought about the basic design, does not mean it's going to be in the game in the next expansion or at all.

KIller Wabbit wrote:
Ideas are easy.
Yes, they are. And thus CCP needs to be cautious about using its marketing department or free-thinking / speaking developers to build up customer expectations solely based upon ideas that are unable to be delivered upon in-game.

What we are really talking about here is the concept of customer expectations management as well as the truths of CCP's business plans and resource allocations.

CCP has set themselves up with some client management challenges having seriously misallocated development time and resources with Incarna and, to an extent, Inferno. These were two development cycles assigned to stuffs that either customers didn't want or that actively killed subscriptions. These two periods of time could have been used to address the broken fundamentals of the game (corp roles, POS stuff, etc.) as well as the pie-in-the-sky ideas that improve upon existing game elements (ring mining, etc.).

Now, there is a continued backlog of necessary work on which CCP is playing catch-up all the while attempting to launch / integrate their gold-digging DUST project. How CCP Unifex manages to balance all of these competing interests will be telling.

Lastly, I am curious to see how CCP will improve upon managing customer expectations during their 10th anniversary Fanfest event w/o completely ******* themselves over with ideas that will never be delivered.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

BEPOHNKA
Ner Vod Fleet Systems
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2013-01-29 14:54:23 UTC  |  Edited by: BEPOHNKA
Kalle Demos wrote:
Im so glad a link was posted explaining what ring mining is



sorry i added some information what the idea was about...
at this point we want something nice to keep us all happy and busy to keep playing eve with the same game set up..Pirate
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#23 - 2013-01-29 15:22:14 UTC
I have removed some trollish rumor mongering from this thread.

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents

Felicity Love
Doomheim
#24 - 2013-01-29 15:42:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicity Love
Someday. Roll

Summer release, if we're lucky.

DUST, and a new production methodology to implement first -- see funky charts on Dev Blogs and/or slog your way through the CSM Minutes for info.

Otherwise, keep an eye on this year's FANFEST speeches -- always good info there.

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#25 - 2013-01-29 15:55:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:
dexington wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
How many times have we heard this over the last 6 years on so many features that have just failed too happen and keep getting pushed back.
Just because someone at CCP thinks some feature/content would be cool, and have thought about the basic design, does not mean it's going to be in the game in the next expansion or at all.

KIller Wabbit wrote:
Ideas are easy.
Yes, they are. And thus CCP needs to be cautious about using its marketing department or free-thinking / speaking developers to build up customer expectations solely based upon ideas that are unable to be delivered upon in-game.

What we are really talking about here is the concept of customer expectations management as well as the truths of CCP's business plans and resource allocations.

CCP has set themselves up with some client management challenges having seriously misallocated development time and resources with Incarna and, to an extent, Inferno. These were two development cycles assigned to stuffs that either customers didn't want or that actively killed subscriptions. These two periods of time could have been used to address the broken fundamentals of the game (corp roles, POS stuff, etc.) as well as the pie-in-the-sky ideas that improve upon existing game elements (ring mining, etc.).

Now, there is a continued backlog of necessary work on which CCP is playing catch-up all the while attempting to launch / integrate their gold-digging DUST project. How CCP Unifex manages to balance all of these competing interests will be telling.

Lastly, I am curious to see how CCP will improve upon managing customer expectations during their 10th anniversary Fanfest event w/o completely ******* themselves over with ideas that will never be delivered.


I imagine they will get better at managing player expectations when their customers stop taking statements like:

We'd love to be able to develop a Ring Mining mechanic eventually that works something like this... what do you think? We are considering devoting resources to prototyping it to see if it is a workable concept when there is time in the development schedule.

and instead hearing:

We PROMISE we are going to have Ring Mining as a fully functional mechanic in the next release or two. WE PROMISE!!!

Until this idiocy stops (which it likely never will) you will continue to hear people complain bitterly about broken promises and misguiding customer expectations.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#26 - 2013-01-29 16:17:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
At least the people in this thread are aware of what the proposed Ring Mining concept is all about.

I was in a debate yesterday with an individual about how the mining mechanics could be revamped to be more interesting and make a larger impact on the game. He calmly shot down every proposed change to the currnet mechanics, proclaiming that currently mining is perfect as is... and presented himself as an authority on all things mining related.

Until Ring Mining was mentioned. He then proclaimed he had never heard of such a silly thing.

At that point I finally did some checking and discovered our "expert" had been playing a whole 2 months.

Truthfully, shame on me for not realizing it sooner.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2013-01-29 16:59:18 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
At that point I finally did some checking and discovered our "expert" had been playing a whole 2 months.
.


To be fair, mining is such a bad joke that you totally could become an expert on it within 2 months.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#28 - 2013-01-29 17:08:41 UTC
Check out my post where I suggest an alternative to ring mining. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=199181&find=unread

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#29 - 2013-01-29 17:30:55 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
At that point I finally did some checking and discovered our "expert" had been playing a whole 2 months.
.


To be fair, mining is such a bad joke that you totally could become an expert on it within 2 months.

Very true, but would anyone we could consider a mining expert resolutely assert that mining was perfect as is?

So yes, he could have been, but had difficulties seeing beyond the tip of his nose.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
The Perfect Harvesting Experience
#30 - 2013-01-29 17:54:42 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
You can't improve an engine by taking out one critical part that is old, replace it with a new high tech one that doesn't fit and have it stuck on with duct tape.


You're not Minmatar are you?


We call it a Ragnarok.
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
#31 - 2013-01-29 18:10:44 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Pohbis wrote:
Retribution happened.

I do think the harvesting and manufacturing updates are still on the table, but for the Winter expansion.

Let us be completely blunt.

How many times have we heard this over the last 6 years on so many features that have just failed too happen and keep getting pushed back.

For me actions speak louder than words and there are a lot of areas in this game that have had the words but zero action.
To be fair, most of those are people unable to tell the difference between CCP floating an idea, and CCP committing to an idea.

The first signs of CCP committing to a roadmap for ring-mining was at Fanfest 2012, with their plans to focus on harvesting and manufacturing after Inferno.

Now judging by the CSM Minutes, I think it's fair to say that they actually did look into the whole industry/POS/ring-mining thing but that it turned out to be too big a task, especially with their new focus on delivering expansions with multiple smaller updates to mechanics, focused around a specific theme.

We might very well see some initial updates to the industry framework this summer.

The reason I put the Winter 2013 expansion on the table is that, as far as I remember from the CSM Minutes, it's supposed to tackle 0.0 sovereignty. A big part of that could very well be bottom-up alliance income, like ring-mining. It's an obvious chance for an industry themed expansion, allowing CCP to make good on a little bit of everything. Ring-mining, modular POS, production/science interface, corp roles etc.
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2013-01-29 19:05:38 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
So yes, he could have been, but had difficulties seeing beyond the tip of his nose.


You already said he was a miner, no need to get redundant.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Pyre leFay
Doomheim
#33 - 2013-01-29 20:21:51 UTC
Its back to quicker and easier Jesus features.
Bring Eve back to life biannually since its perpetually dieing.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#34 - 2013-01-29 21:38:00 UTC
When we finally send someone to Mars rather than a probe the size of an SUV (which was actually pretty cool how they landed the last one). Hell, I don't know. When CCP get's done with it I guess...or at least when they think it's ready for deployment.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Sir Diablos
Requiem Knowledge
#35 - 2013-01-29 21:42:23 UTC
BEPOHNKA wrote:
Ring mining was very cool idea.... shack alot of people and you would be effecting lot of players.... Shocked

Ideas when this could happen??? please oh please????


""Ring Mining" was about adding belts which miners would mine moon goo instead of towers doing the work."
THE MOON GOO WHEN BELONG TO US ALL! Twisted


Goons and Co. weren't done mining all the Tech yet, so CCP told them they'd hold off until they were ready. *wink, nudge*

Or something like that, I don't know, nulsec is boring anyways.

I sometimes have to wonder when the harshness of space was replaced with the soft foamy feel of a theme park.

Frying Doom
#36 - 2013-01-29 22:08:46 UTC
Pohbis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Pohbis wrote:
Retribution happened.

I do think the harvesting and manufacturing updates are still on the table, but for the Winter expansion.

Let us be completely blunt.

How many times have we heard this over the last 6 years on so many features that have just failed too happen and keep getting pushed back.

For me actions speak louder than words and there are a lot of areas in this game that have had the words but zero action.
To be fair, most of those are people unable to tell the difference between CCP floating an idea, and CCP committing to an idea.

The first signs of CCP committing to a roadmap for ring-mining was at Fanfest 2012, with their plans to focus on harvesting and manufacturing after Inferno.

Now judging by the CSM Minutes, I think it's fair to say that they actually did look into the whole industry/POS/ring-mining thing but that it turned out to be too big a task, especially with their new focus on delivering expansions with multiple smaller updates to mechanics, focused around a specific theme.

We might very well see some initial updates to the industry framework this summer.

The reason I put the Winter 2013 expansion on the table is that, as far as I remember from the CSM Minutes, it's supposed to tackle 0.0 sovereignty. A big part of that could very well be bottom-up alliance income, like ring-mining. It's an obvious chance for an industry themed expansion, allowing CCP to make good on a little bit of everything. Ring-mining, modular POS, production/science interface, corp roles etc.

Ok so when they said that the team that was to work on POS were busy atm working on crime watch and would do it in this coming expansion, that was just floating an idea?

Also you missed the fact that the CSM session on corp interface was cancelled, so that is not on the list atm.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#37 - 2013-01-29 22:16:17 UTC
Frankly ring mining is something that desperately needs to happen, at least if it's anything like the moongoo-replacing player-controlled scheme I understood it as.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

turmajin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2013-01-29 22:34:00 UTC
The idea was to mine planetary rings like Saturns ,for 0.0 minerals inc TECH,I suspect they would have been seeded thouout 0.0 and low sec, mostly thus breaking the tech bubble and stranglehold of the CFC and hopefully getting players into low sec space in numbers,might even have got small amounts from ring mining in high sec. systems But its been put off for the moment because i suspect CCP havent worked out how its going to effect the in game ecomony and all its ramifications.I hope it does eventually come though,as it offers alot of possibilities for small or large scale ops ,and PvP from those ops.,and gives smaller alliances an objective of say dominating a low- sec systems,and gaining the wealth to eventually challage the big 0.0 corps/ alliances
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2013-01-29 23:13:35 UTC
Actually what would be fun is if Ring mining and moon goo were both existing.
So that you could have a garunteed source from the moons, but anyone could do ring mining (which is solely in low)
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2013-01-30 03:55:32 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:


I imagine they will get better at managing player expectations when their customers stop taking statements like:

We'd love to be able to develop a Ring Mining mechanic eventually that works something like this... what do you think? We are considering devoting resources to prototyping it to see if it is a workable concept when there is time in the development schedule.

and instead hearing:

We PROMISE we are going to have Ring Mining as a fully functional mechanic in the next release or two. WE PROMISE!!!

Until this idiocy stops (which it likely never will) you will continue to hear people complain bitterly about broken promises and misguiding customer expectations.



IDK, I suppose when a company makes the effort of producing a video demonstrating the concept it might lead the audience to believe the feature is past the conceptual idea stage of development and a bit closer to actual development. Can't really blame the audience for making assumptions.

Now, if it were merely discussion and hand drawn concept art, then I'd agree with you.



Don't ban me, bro!

Previous page123Next page