These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Improvements to mining missions
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-08-26 07:53:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I've got a few very simple ideas to improve the quality of mining missions. I realize and readily accept that mining missions are a very small slice of EVE, and therefore I have taken special consideration to ensure that all of these changes are simple and probably very easy to implement. Nonetheless, I believe they will have a very positive impact on mining missions.


1.) Level 2 Mining Missions are for Ventures
* spread the ore much further from the warp-in, at least 20-30km
This is the case already with some but not all. This will force mining ships must travel some distance to get to the ore. Ventures can do this easily. Mining barges are slow and will thus become un-ideal for such missions. Total ore to mine can then be reduced according to the reduced mining speed of a Venture. This will assist newer players by making level 2 missions easier for them even when they do not yet have a barge.



2.) Provide Extra Ore
* missions should have more ore than the mission calls for
* missions should respawn ore after downtime even if they have been mined
To complete the mission, you must both mine the required amount from it, then turn that much in to the agent. If you lose the ore somehow, you've got to wait till after downtime for the mission to respawn, only it won't respawn if you finished mining it.
Making this change will not allow you to complete mining missions merely by buying ore from players; you must mine the required amount of ore from the mission even if you already possess that amount. Providing extra ore will help buffer this and if you read my bio, will put me out of a job. I'd love to no longer have to stress about incompletable missions.



3.) Procurer/Skiff Missions
* make new level 3 and 4 missions with less mining and stronger NPCs present
* balanced to be completable in a Procurer or Skiff but require a significant tank
* the ore should be no more than 12,000m3
It can be spread out a bit so the skiff takes some time drifting from one ore spot to the next, while killing NPCs along the way. This will make for a much more exciting mission which will be much preferable to those who like to mine defensively. It'll also just be more fun and engaging. Players who want a more passive style can simply choose the currently existing level 4s. Maybe do like the burner missions and make these give no standings loss when you decline.



4.) Get Some Real Ore While You're At It
* add standard ore to some of the mining mission pockets
* agents ignore this ore, player mines it at their own discretion
Got some extra space in your ore hold and don't mind spending a few more minutes in the pocket? Why not fill up on some Veldspar? Combat missions have it, why not mining missions? It would provide a more consistent way to find ore inside a mission pocket, but could be in smaller amounts to balance out. Of course many players will just ignore it because they wish to get the missions done as fast as possible. And that's a decision left for the player to decide.



5.) More Time or Less Money
* either add more content to each mining mission or decrease the loyalty point payout
Mining missions can make ISK faster than combat missions because they offer the same pay for a (usually) much shorter mission. You get less total direct ISK because there aren't a lot of NPC bounties, but with the same loyalty point payout as combat missions, you can amass huge amounts of loyalty points much more quickly than by running combat missions, not to mention far more easily. For those who know how to spend them, those loyalty points are the majority of the profit.
I think mining mission loyalty point payout should be significantly reduced, unless the amount you have to mine were increased.

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."
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#2 - 2014-08-26 08:36:01 UTC
Do people actually do mining missions?

Will they even bother with Lv3/4 missions if they have to fit for something other than max yield? Oh, but .. I do want to say that if we're going to tinker with Lv3/4 mining missions they should just be straight-up revamps of the existing ones and there shouldn't be any new "optional" aspect to them.
Colitina
Doomheim
#3 - 2014-08-26 08:43:56 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do people actually do mining missions?

Will they even bother with Lv3/4 missions if they have to fit for something other than max yield? Oh, but .. I do want to say that if we're going to tinker with Lv3/4 mining missions they should just be straight-up revamps of the existing ones and there shouldn't be any new "optional" aspect to them.

Surprisingly lucrative. Better ISK/hr than actual mining, although ice is still better.
Residium Fall
Doomheim
#4 - 2014-08-26 08:51:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Residium Fall
Ofc people do them.

Kinda disagree with most of this at least as far as L4s go, they seem to be in a fairly good place. The odd mission forcing Skiffs might add variety but I for one like the way they're somewhat detatched from the economy and giving people (effectively) safe places to mine standard ore doesn't seem positive either.

Be nice to have more agents though, there's really quite a poor choice of locations atm.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-08-26 09:37:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Will they even bother with Lv3/4 missions if they have to fit for something other than max yield?

Doesn't seem very counter-intuitive when the mission requires less ore to be mined. Sure you can come in a Hulk but you'll probably get it popped by rats or at least be forced to warp off pretty soon after arriving.


Residium Fall wrote:
The odd mission forcing Skiffs

They don't have to be forced. Personally, I'd like to see some agents specialize in skiffs while others specialize in hulks/mackinaws. That way you can choose your poison. But at least making the skiff missions free to decline would make it easy to run just the others if you are so inclined. After all, you could run hulk missions in a skiff, but you couldn't run skiff missions in a hulk.

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."
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#6 - 2014-08-26 09:43:35 UTC
I think people would just get the mining missions done even faster. There are certain entities in certain 00 sec areas, who do nothing else but run L4 mining missions in Venture blobs. They are done in a matter of minutes. I am pretty sure that none of these suggestions would require them to change anything in their behavior. Blink

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-08-26 09:58:21 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I think people would just get the mining missions done even faster.
Yes, and at the cost of being ATK. I think it's a good thing to provide miners a benefit for being present, though allowing a less profitable passive experience is important too.

I strongly doubt that the players running level 4 mining missions in nullsec are making bank off them. It's probably a decent income, but probably low enough for that kind of boost to not be all that significant. Could make the rats all focus-fire though. They may still be able to run the mission but with danger of failing to kill the rats before they take a venture out.

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."
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#8 - 2014-08-26 10:05:18 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I think people would just get the mining missions done even faster.
Yes, and at the cost of being ATK. I think it's a good thing to provide miners a benefit for being present, though allowing a less profitable passive experience is important too.

I strongly doubt that the players running level 4 mining missions in nullsec are making bank off them. It's probably a decent income, but probably low enough for that kind of boost to not be all that significant. Could make the rats all focus-fire though. They may still be able to run the mission but with danger of failing to kill the rats before they take a venture out.


They have a better ISK/h ratio than Security agents. ^^

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#9 - 2014-08-26 12:16:47 UTC
Colitina wrote:
Surprisingly lucrative. Better ISK/hr than actual mining, although ice is still better.

Shhhhhhhhhhhh...
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-08-26 16:02:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Rivr Luzade wrote:
They have a better ISK/h ratio than Security agents. ^^

That's a bit surprising to me. I've never run missions in nullsec, but in the level 4 mining missions I run, you have to mine for so long you could have easily finished a level 4 security mission in that much time. The security mission pays better because most of the profit comes from the rats killed, unless you have a particularly valuable LP set.

Security missions also go well with more players, while mining missions give the best ratios solo--this due to the only important factors being mining speed vs. travel time. Unless the mining corp LP are more valuable, I don't see how mining missions make better ISK/hr than security.

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."
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#11 - 2014-08-26 16:09:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
They have a better ISK/h ratio than Security agents. ^^

That's a bit surprising to me. I've never run missions in nullsec, but in the level 4 mining missions I run, you have to mine for so long you could have easily finished a level 4 security mission in that much time. The security mission pays better because most of the profit comes from the rats killed, unless you have a particularly valuable LP set.

Security missions also go well with more players, while mining missions give the best ratios solo--this due to the only important factors being mining speed vs. travel time. Unless the mining corp LP are more valuable, I don't see how mining missions make better ISK/hr than security.

"Yes, bad, bad minign missions, terrible, make them better.... and all you said above is right and true!" - Rubbing his hands waiting for the boost in the next patch
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2014-08-30 06:39:05 UTC
bump, with added #5.) in the OP

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."