These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Remove High-Sec Belts and replace with Roaming Grav Sites
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Angelic Resolution
The Arcanum
#41 - 2013-03-21 05:20:51 UTC
^^ on the money
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#42 - 2013-03-21 06:09:09 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
I also must say the current asteroid belt system makes no sense at all from a science perspective. By what means would a 100km long half cirlce of asteroids appear over the surface of a planet in arbitrary positions?



Same can be said of grav sites. Why would you get asteroids in one localised place? It's gameplay driven.

The point of our belt system is to concentrate people into one place to gather resources, driving opportunities for conflict. It fails miserably at this as highsec belts are so safe that there is no incentive to take 10 mining ships and a PVP escort of 3-4 combat ships into lowsec when you jsut get more ore having all 13-14 characters mining in highsec. (And they can multibox for bigger rewards again which isn't really viable in low).

Adding a probing requirement would make highsec mining even safer, promoting more botting.


Here's a suggestion I posted that I think gets that balance right: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216939 - focusing on concentrating players together by making the rats more relevant and less predictable.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Angelic Resolution
The Arcanum
#43 - 2013-03-21 06:43:32 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
I also must say the current asteroid belt system makes no sense at all from a science perspective. By what means would a 100km long half cirlce of asteroids appear over the surface of a planet in arbitrary positions?



Same can be said of grav sites. Why would you get asteroids in one localised place? It's gameplay driven.

The point of our belt system is to concentrate people into one place to gather resources, driving opportunities for conflict. It fails miserably at this as highsec belts are so safe that there is no incentive to take 10 mining ships and a PVP escort of 3-4 combat ships into lowsec when you jsut get more ore having all 13-14 characters mining in highsec. (And they can multibox for bigger rewards again which isn't really viable in low).

Adding a probing requirement would make highsec mining even safer, promoting more botting.


Here's a suggestion I posted that I think gets that balance right: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216939 - focusing on concentrating players together by making the rats more relevant and less predictable.


Comets don't move in and out of solar systems? Asteroids don't strike the earth or come close and bounce off atmo?

How's that not realistic that they'd be mineable? Hell even the Moon has minerals commonly found on earth - no surprise there really.

People aren't going to fight either way and attempting to force conflict really won't win any awards - hence the previous post of war deccing over a belt, like that'd happen.

As for safer belts; if done correctly and a decrease of 10-20% reduced responses times - as already written in the thread if you'd read it properly - would be more dangerous consider 0.5 systems - the most profitable - have a response time of 20 seconds. In a Grav site belt, let's push it to 30-45 seconds. That's enough time for 10 cata's to kill an entire fleet. They just have to scan you down first.

Although I do like your idea of different concentrations depending on the sec status - along with rat changes - it doesn't solve the current problem of those in a different geographic location have an advantage on roid spawn days.
Angelic Resolution
The Arcanum
#44 - 2013-03-21 06:48:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Angelic Resolution
double post fail
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#45 - 2013-03-22 00:09:05 UTC
Angelic Resolution wrote:
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
I also must say the current asteroid belt system makes no sense at all from a science perspective. By what means would a 100km long half cirlce of asteroids appear over the surface of a planet in arbitrary positions?



Same can be said of grav sites. Why would you get asteroids in one localised place? It's gameplay driven.

The point of our belt system is to concentrate people into one place to gather resources, driving opportunities for conflict. It fails miserably at this as highsec belts are so safe that there is no incentive to take 10 mining ships and a PVP escort of 3-4 combat ships into lowsec when you jsut get more ore having all 13-14 characters mining in highsec. (And they can multibox for bigger rewards again which isn't really viable in low).

Adding a probing requirement would make highsec mining even safer, promoting more botting.


Here's a suggestion I posted that I think gets that balance right: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216939 - focusing on concentrating players together by making the rats more relevant and less predictable.


Comets don't move in and out of solar systems? Asteroids don't strike the earth or come close and bounce off atmo?

How's that not realistic that they'd be mineable? Hell even the Moon has minerals commonly found on earth - no surprise there really.

People aren't going to fight either way and attempting to force conflict really won't win any awards - hence the previous post of war deccing over a belt, like that'd happen.

As for safer belts; if done correctly and a decrease of 10-20% reduced responses times - as already written in the thread if you'd read it properly - would be more dangerous consider 0.5 systems - the most profitable - have a response time of 20 seconds. In a Grav site belt, let's push it to 30-45 seconds. That's enough time for 10 cata's to kill an entire fleet. They just have to scan you down first.

Although I do like your idea of different concentrations depending on the sec status - along with rat changes - it doesn't solve the current problem of those in a different geographic location have an advantage on roid spawn days.


I guess we see mining differently, so we won't agree overall. I see it as just a way to drive conflict by providing a lucrative reward to be the bottom of the food chain.

As for the time of day effect - I'd rather that asteroids spawn on a random timer rather than only at downtime, and/or grav sites spawning when belts are dry.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2013-03-22 04:56:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:


Same can be said of grav sites. Why would you get asteroids in one localised place? It's gameplay driven.

The point of our belt system is to concentrate people into one place to gather resources, driving opportunities for conflict. It fails miserably at this as highsec belts are so safe that there is no incentive to take 10 mining ships and a PVP escort of 3-4 combat ships into lowsec when you jsut get more ore having all 13-14 characters mining in highsec. (And they can multibox for bigger rewards again which isn't really viable in low).

Adding a probing requirement would make highsec mining even safer, promoting more botting.


Here's a suggestion I posted that I think gets that balance right: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216939 - focusing on concentrating players together by making the rats more relevant and less predictable.

Id say a small cluster of asteroids in a random location in space that changes regularly is far more realistic than the current system.

Also as for promoting botting, your argument is silly. Anyone who really wants to suicide gank can drop combats and quickly find a bunch of hulks in a densely packed system, its not that hard. Gankers don't need an obvious warp to in order to find people.
It would make botting harder because from what I know about how bots work, they function off bookmarks. You bookmark a few spots in the belts around a system and your bot is set forever. You can run your bot every day with 1 click. If asteroid belts moved every day then every time someone wants to set up a bot they will have to find a new grav site every time they clear a belt.
Suddenly botting is obsolete since you can't bot probing (at least for this decade), and running your retriever while watching tv with an egg timer makes much more sense. Average botter who sets a bot up before work/school doesn't have time to scan out all the grav sites. Casual mining botters are dead in hisec.


So really gankers dont give a **** about probing, I used to do it all the time for ganking missioners. (maybe in null sec they would)
Grav sites would utterly ruin all current botting systems, especially if you break up the grav sites into lots of little belts.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Angelic Resolution
The Arcanum
#47 - 2013-03-22 05:17:39 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:

As for the time of day effect - I'd rather that asteroids spawn on a random timer rather than only at downtime, and/or grav sites spawning when belts are dry.


At least we agree on something =)
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2013-03-22 06:27:00 UTC
Angelic Resolution wrote:
2 Fold reason for this:
1) It does away with botters pretty well as they'd need to scan down a site prior to actually using it.
2) As an aussie logging in after roid respawn DT, there's nothing left. I've gone 5 systems over scouting for a belt and it's all gone.

Make the Grav sites more challenging if needed but by mining out a Grav Site have another one spawn 4-8 hours later so it can be regulated - and won't drive mineral prices down.

And for those wondering, no it won't affect noobies, they're taught to use scanner probes from the get-go now.


This would be absolutely no guarentee the bots would not be in these belts.. once they've scanned the belt down the botting software could proceed without interuption. and there also is no guarentee that bots are the cause of your problem with empted belts. Having been a large scale miner for many years I know many others who mine whole systems up and never AFK while doing it.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Adam Zalonis
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2013-03-22 07:28:29 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
I also must say the current asteroid belt system makes no sense at all from a science perspective. By what means would a 100km long half cirlce of asteroids appear over the surface of a planet in arbitrary positions?



Same can be said of grav sites. Why would you get asteroids in one localised place?


Lagrange points, for one.
Angelic Resolution
The Arcanum
#50 - 2013-03-22 15:36:21 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:
Angelic Resolution wrote:
2 Fold reason for this:
1) It does away with botters pretty well as they'd need to scan down a site prior to actually using it.
2) As an aussie logging in after roid respawn DT, there's nothing left. I've gone 5 systems over scouting for a belt and it's all gone.

Make the Grav sites more challenging if needed but by mining out a Grav Site have another one spawn 4-8 hours later so it can be regulated - and won't drive mineral prices down.

And for those wondering, no it won't affect noobies, they're taught to use scanner probes from the get-go now.


This would be absolutely no guarentee the bots would not be in these belts.. once they've scanned the belt down the botting software could proceed without interuption. and there also is no guarentee that bots are the cause of your problem with empted belts. Having been a large scale miner for many years I know many others who mine whole systems up and never AFK while doing it.



As already stated in the thread, casual botters - those that setup the bot before going to work, going to bed etc - would stop. Large scale botting operations become something of an irritation of having to scan down belts constantly and I do mean constantly.

What's more is, I never said belts being stripped were the result of Bots directly. What I did say however is that it's getting irritating logging in after downtime to find belts in any near by system stripped of ores within High-Sec and that it's getting increasing irritating that those in an optimal time zone get the benefits of DT respawns.

=)

Adam Zalonis wrote:
Lagrange points, for one.


Bang on the money there which is why's it is odd that Moons can only support 1 POS when a Planet/Moon has a few Lagrange points. However you must admit that the likelyhood of debris at the rate they do - DT's - is that high. That and the number of belts around planets/moons doesn't support the theory IMO heh

It'd be great if EVE was scientifically factual in that, roids belts form near these points and then POS's/refinery outposts could mine them but that'd be too automated heh
Angelic Resolution
The Arcanum
#51 - 2013-03-28 06:06:33 UTC
Anyone had any further thoughts on how to solve the roid respawn days?
Aestivalis Saidrian
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#52 - 2013-03-28 08:17:42 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:



Same can be said of grav sites. Why would you get asteroids in one localised place? It's gameplay driven.

The point of our belt system is to concentrate people into one place to gather resources, driving opportunities for conflict. It fails miserably at this as highsec belts are so safe that there is no incentive to take 10 mining ships and a PVP escort of 3-4 combat ships into lowsec when you jsut get more ore having all 13-14 characters mining in highsec. (And they can multibox for bigger rewards again which isn't really viable in low).

Adding a probing requirement would make highsec mining even safer, promoting more botting.


Here's a suggestion I posted that I think gets that balance right: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216939 - focusing on concentrating players together by making the rats more relevant and less predictable.


You show up in a belt with 10 miners and 4 escorts, and every ******* pirate, militia, and possibly some bored supercaps will be on your ass within ten minutes.

There's no reason. Ever. To mine in Lowsec outside of mining with things like Ventures. (And definitely not exhumers.) Even then, assuming wtfmax skills and no links, you can barely pull in one refine portion of Jaspet etc. with one cycle and two mining laser IIs. Assuming you have a max skilled miner.

Lowsec is where vultures live. And like vultures, the inhabitants of Lowsec will know where you are within fifteen minutes of you landing in system.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#53 - 2013-03-28 08:47:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Rented
I find the notion that this would prevent bots in the slightest... fairly amusing. I suspect you greatly overestimate the difficulty of automating scanning, not that it much matters. I could do it myself and I'm really not very good at that sort of thing.

That given, the reasons you give are respectively-
1) Totally ineffective, and a far greater annoyance to legit players than botters, rendering this point practically irrelevant.
2) Virtually unrelated, if you somehow have difficulty finding rocks in highsec (a feat of its own), addressing the issue of rocks respawning only at downtime, directly, would be more reasonable.
Buzzmong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2013-03-28 09:59:10 UTC
I thought there were workings going on internally at CCP to move the entire belt system into a ring mining system?
Octoven
Stellar Production
#55 - 2013-03-28 13:57:40 UTC
DataRunner Attor wrote:
At the moment I can't support this idea as the amount of effort to scan down certain grav sites can cause mineral prices to sky rocket even further. "It strange really, you high secers think that every extra second you spend mining something you can increase prices, even though you have a much smaller change of dieing and losing all said minerals."


So what you are saying is it takes effort for you to find miners to gank? Pirate

I love the idea, it forces players to PLAY the game to get any returns and lets people keep their scanning skills up to par.
Octoven
Stellar Production
#56 - 2013-03-28 14:00:28 UTC
Rented wrote:
I find the notion that this would prevent bots in the slightest... fairly amusing. I suspect you greatly overestimate the difficulty of automating scanning, not that it much matters. I could do it myself and I'm really not very good at that sort of thing.

That given, the reasons you give are respectively-
1) Totally ineffective, and a far greater annoyance to legit players than botters, rendering this point practically irrelevant.
2) Virtually unrelated, if you somehow have difficulty finding rocks in highsec (a feat of its own), addressing the issue of rocks re spawning only at downtime, directly, would be more reasonable.


If you are suggesting doing two responds a day, DT and 12 hours later, I think that action would be the one to flood the market with minerals and kill the cost. Bots mine until the belt is empty, by re spawning it 12 hours later you are likely to make it easier to bot....I don't suppose you bot for making that suggestion?
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#57 - 2013-03-28 15:56:54 UTC
I'm particularly amused by people suggesting that this would make the game less accessible to new players. Trying to mine normal hisec belts was one of the most demoralizing experiences of my early EVE career because of the contrast between how easy it was presented as being and how frustrating it actually. Belts in new-player systems ARE mined out, and it sucks. If the game presented, and was, an environment where new miners are told that resources in deep enpire space are depleted except for difficult-to-find pockets of asteroids, I think this would be a very positive thing, and push people interested in industry to explore more and earlier.
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#58 - 2013-03-28 16:01:44 UTC
I'd extend this to all areas of space. Fixed belts should just go away completely.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#59 - 2013-03-28 16:05:56 UTC
Xavier Thorm wrote:
I'm particularly amused by people suggesting that this would make the game less accessible to new players. Trying to mine normal hisec belts was one of the most demoralizing experiences of my early EVE career because of the contrast between how easy it was presented as being and how frustrating it actually.

That's just your own, personal and biased opinion.
In contrast, I have a corp member, that is nearly exalted by mining, and decidedly training for Exhumers right now. When I told him I've bought an Orca, he was all like "YAU!!!" and asked, when he would see her around.

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison
Dave Stark
#60 - 2013-03-28 16:14:19 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Grav sites should be something you can find with the system scanner anyway, and that requires no skills to use whatsoever. Newbie problem solved.


i fail to see the point in this.

instead of right clicking anywhere and clicking warp to belt, i have to open the scanner, hit scan, then warp to a belt.
other than more clicks and thus tedium, what does this actually achieve?