These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Game of Stones

Author
Lienzo
Amanuensis
#1 - 2015-02-08 22:13:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Lienzo
"Infinite" Belts

Imagine if you warped to a static belt, that what greeted you on arrival was a simple beacon and a dispersed set of rocks filling the whole grid, and of course that spiffy new spectral lighting effect and dust. However, if you flew all the way to the edge of that grid to the next one, another field of rocks would be spawned that would last until downtime. The further you get from the beacon, the bigger the asteroids would be on average, and the more numerous or densely populated they would be on grid. This would need to be a logistic growth curve, logically.

In each grid that you spawn, perhaps there may be a chance to find npcs there, possibly even a base. The possibilities for incorporating exploration are vaster than the scope of this document.


Reward vs. Risk

We all know that high-end ores just aren't worth that much generally. You could charge 10x the price on megacyte, and it would only increase the cost of a typical t1 hull by 2%. The real value here isn't scarcity, but human labor on extraction and movement. Therefore, I propose that we inflate the 5% and 10% variants to a more considerable density increase. I would suggest 50% and 100% respectively. Low density ABCs could be spawned in empire, while higher density ores would cluster in less secure space. I would furthermore suggest refunding the refining skills, and replacing them with just two or three, focusing on the low density, medium density and high density ore successively.

Next, since we have our infinite belts, and need reasons to skulk about in them even with hostiles around, we need new mechanics to play cat and mouse. I propose that every asteroid sport both a mobile scan inhibitor and a variable sized mobile warp disruptor effect. These would be invisible, but would display on your overview when the effect was active. The only time you would see other players is when they were on-grid uncloaked, or on d-scan when they were moving between asteroids.


Travel is the best education

We need a way to promote in-belt travel, even at the risk of creating bottlenecks. To this end, we could have all belt grids act like deadspaces. You won't be able to warp directly to your friends in them. Instead, everyone starts at the beacon, but anywhere on that grid. They must then race along to seek out their objective or allies.

This is important, because it makes ore hauling members of the squad really critical. If the group has an orca or a rorqual, they can actually use it inside of the ore belt to tremendous effect. The ability to store or compress lots of ore on-site tremendously increases the value of these investments. Botters having to adapt their scripts would probably be the least significant consequence created by such changes.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#2 - 2015-02-08 22:33:29 UTC
I think you're on to something here. I'm on mobile so I'll be brief, the inflation of high density ores would be a significant boost of value to more dangerous space, however j think your suggestion of 50-100% increase is a bit much. And if you're suggesting high-end ores spawning in all space j think that's a very decent trade off.
Iain Cariaba
#3 - 2015-02-08 23:06:45 UTC
How many bad ideas can we shoe horn into one suggestion?

Let's see here, we've got spread out rocks, so you're farther from the beacon, allowing you to see incoming hositles on grid, allowing you to warp out long before they ever have a chance to make it to you. We've got increased high density ores to drive down market value of minerals. We've got invisible scan inhibitors, so the big bad neuts can't see you mining. Oh, and even if someone gets a cloaky ship on grid with you, they still can't call in support, unless it's also cloaked, because you can't be warped directly to. Be smart enough to seed the beacon with loads of decloak cans, and you really don't even need to worry about cloaked ships, you'll see them coming.

And what's the penalty for not having your mining interrupted? The haulers have to slowboat to pick up the ore!!! Well, they do if they're not smart enough to use a MTU to drag the cans in from 125km away. Oh, you might need 2 MTUs set in a chain for those rocks that are really far away.

I'm going to put in a big, resounding no for this idea.
Colette Kassia
Kassia Industrial Supply
#4 - 2015-02-08 23:13:10 UTC
Lienzo wrote:
[b]We all know that high-end ores just aren't worth that much generally. You could charge 10x the price on megacyte, and it would only increase the cost of a typical t1 hull by 2%. The real value here isn't scarcity, but human labor on extraction and movement. Therefore, I propose that we inflate the 5% and 10% variants to a more considerable density increase. I would suggest 50% and 100% respectively. Low density ABCs could be spawned in empire, while higher density ores would cluster in less secure space.

This is one of the better ideas I've come across to adjust the risk-reward of mining in different security levels. If you look at the ore values you'll see that there really isn't much difference in the value of various rocks (certainly not enough to justify the greatly increased risk of lowsec mining). If refining yields for more exotic ores were buffed then the nullsec miners would simply pursue the higher value ores until economic forces flatten out the isk/hour spectrum, as they have already done.

That said, I'm not a fan of the infinite belt concept. I would just warp in with a small fast ship, set a course in a random direction, and make a bookmark 1000km away from the warp-in point. You might counter this by making it work like deadspace, in that you can only warp-in at one single point, regardless of bookmarks. But once you do that you create an ambush ganker's paradise. There wouldn't be much real mining going on.

I'm more a fan of going the opposite direction. I would eliminate belts from high and low sec and replace them with many, many tiny ore sites that you'd have to scan down. In higher security space you'd find only small potatoes. Going deeper, the sites would yield larger rocks, and clusters of rocks, in addition to better ores. This would shift the value difference from the ore composition that you put in your hauler to the amount of labor required to fill a hauler. To prevent the huge number (dozens to hundreds) of ore sites from cluttering up scan results, a dedicated Gravimetric Scan Probe would need to be created.

(And please no one say, "I would remove all ores from highsec altogether." That would be much, much too heavy handed. You just drive them all into Level IV mission running.)
Kabark
Schilden
#5 - 2015-02-08 23:28:10 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
How many bad ideas can we shoe horn into one suggestion?

Let's see here, we've got spread out rocks, so you're farther from the beacon, allowing you to see incoming hositles on grid, allowing you to warp out long before they ever have a chance to make it to you. We've got increased high density ores to drive down market value of minerals. We've got invisible scan inhibitors, so the big bad neuts can't see you mining. Oh, and even if someone gets a cloaky ship on grid with you, they still can't call in support, unless it's also cloaked, because you can't be warped directly to. Be smart enough to seed the beacon with loads of decloak cans, and you really don't even need to worry about cloaked ships, you'll see them coming.

And what's the penalty for not having your mining interrupted? The haulers have to slowboat to pick up the ore!!! Well, they do if they're not smart enough to use a MTU to drag the cans in from 125km away. Oh, you might need 2 MTUs set in a chain for those rocks that are really far away.

I'm going to put in a big, resounding no for this idea.

Of all the times I disagree with you, I do have to agree with you on this one. This seems like a "let me mine without risk" type of idea and do not agree with it at all.
Iain Cariaba
#6 - 2015-02-08 23:34:07 UTC
Kabark wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
How many bad ideas can we shoe horn into one suggestion?

Let's see here, we've got spread out rocks, so you're farther from the beacon, allowing you to see incoming hositles on grid, allowing you to warp out long before they ever have a chance to make it to you. We've got increased high density ores to drive down market value of minerals. We've got invisible scan inhibitors, so the big bad neuts can't see you mining. Oh, and even if someone gets a cloaky ship on grid with you, they still can't call in support, unless it's also cloaked, because you can't be warped directly to. Be smart enough to seed the beacon with loads of decloak cans, and you really don't even need to worry about cloaked ships, you'll see them coming.

And what's the penalty for not having your mining interrupted? The haulers have to slowboat to pick up the ore!!! Well, they do if they're not smart enough to use a MTU to drag the cans in from 125km away. Oh, you might need 2 MTUs set in a chain for those rocks that are really far away.

I'm going to put in a big, resounding no for this idea.

Of all the times I disagree with you, I do have to agree with you on this one. This seems like a "let me mine without risk" type of idea and do not agree with it at all.

I call 'em as I see 'em. Smile
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#7 - 2015-02-09 00:28:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Kabark wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
How many bad ideas can we shoe horn into one suggestion?

Let's see here, we've got spread out rocks, so you're farther from the beacon, allowing you to see incoming hositles on grid, allowing you to warp out long before they ever have a chance to make it to you. We've got increased high density ores to drive down market value of minerals. We've got invisible scan inhibitors, so the big bad neuts can't see you mining. Oh, and even if someone gets a cloaky ship on grid with you, they still can't call in support, unless it's also cloaked, because you can't be warped directly to. Be smart enough to seed the beacon with loads of decloak cans, and you really don't even need to worry about cloaked ships, you'll see them coming.

And what's the penalty for not having your mining interrupted? The haulers have to slowboat to pick up the ore!!! Well, they do if they're not smart enough to use a MTU to drag the cans in from 125km away. Oh, you might need 2 MTUs set in a chain for those rocks that are really far away.

I'm going to put in a big, resounding no for this idea.

Of all the times I disagree with you, I do have to agree with you on this one. This seems like a "let me mine without risk" type of idea and do not agree with it at all.

I call 'em as I see 'em. Smile

Not to disrupt the circlejerk, but you both forgot the part where the scan-inhibiting rocks also act as warp disruptors of varying sizes, meaning that any risk-averse miner would have to also avoid getting their 30m/sec barge caught in any of these undetectable bubbles.

Let's not forget that one of those neutrals you caricatured warping into the belt would themselves also be invisible. The rocks don't care if you're a miner, an explorer or a hunter and will both dscan-disrupt and warp-disrupt everyone equally. That miner in their 30m/sec barge may not even notice that someone is moving around hunting in a gank catalyst unless they're paying close attention to their overview. Could it be that you missed that in your rush to dismiss an idea out of hand simply because it had "asteroid belt" in it?

It's not a bad idea. Maybe the two of you should focus less on stroking one another's egos and more on careful reading and the full comprehension of what you've read.
Kabark
Schilden
#8 - 2015-02-09 00:58:55 UTC
i don't know where you got the whole stroking egos thing, Iain and I got into it big in one of my submissions a few days ago. But anyway that's not the point. The belt system in place now is good in my opinion. It provides many corps a necessity to maintain SOV and control of high resource systems. If you made an "infinite belt" who is to stop every tom, **** and Harry from flying out 200,000km away from your beacon and bookmarking a nice cosy mining spot?
Thelonious Blake
Miles Research and Development
#9 - 2015-02-09 01:04:27 UTC
Kabark wrote:
If you made an "infinite belt" who is to stop every tom, **** and Harry from flying out 200,000km away from your beacon and bookmarking a nice cosy mining spot?


You miss the part where the barge has to travel those 200,000 kms with 30m/s because its a deadspace pocket.
Kabark
Schilden
#10 - 2015-02-09 01:08:17 UTC
Thelonious Blake wrote:
Kabark wrote:
If you made an "infinite belt" who is to stop every tom, **** and Harry from flying out 200,000km away from your beacon and bookmarking a nice cosy mining spot?


You miss the part where the barge has to travel those 200,000 kms with 30m/s because its a deadspace pocket.

How big is this pocket in question? Because I know I can bookmark a deadspace mission 25,000km out and warp there instead. If the belt is infinite, the pocket simply cannot be. And you can just figure out how big that pocket is and get right outside of it and bookmark.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#11 - 2015-02-09 01:55:04 UTC
Kabark wrote:
Thelonious Blake wrote:
Kabark wrote:
If you made an "infinite belt" who is to stop every tom, **** and Harry from flying out 200,000km away from your beacon and bookmarking a nice cosy mining spot?


You miss the part where the barge has to travel those 200,000 kms with 30m/s because its a deadspace pocket.

How big is this pocket in question? Because I know I can bookmark a deadspace mission 25,000km out and warp there instead. If the belt is infinite, the pocket simply cannot be. And you can just figure out how big that pocket is and get right outside of it and bookmark.


I'm not going to go back and read the OP since I already did that once, but I believe he said it would be a series of deadspace pockets. Once you leave the grid, you immediately move onto a new grid with more rocks and more deadspace and more warp/dscan disruption.

You're really trying very hard to find any possible way that a miner might make themselves remotely safe so that you can say the whole idea is trash based on that one point, aren't you?
Kabark
Schilden
#12 - 2015-02-09 02:19:03 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Kabark wrote:
Thelonious Blake wrote:
Kabark wrote:
If you made an "infinite belt" who is to stop every tom, **** and Harry from flying out 200,000km away from your beacon and bookmarking a nice cosy mining spot?


You miss the part where the barge has to travel those 200,000 kms with 30m/s because its a deadspace pocket.

How big is this pocket in question? Because I know I can bookmark a deadspace mission 25,000km out and warp there instead. If the belt is infinite, the pocket simply cannot be. And you can just figure out how big that pocket is and get right outside of it and bookmark.


I'm not going to go back and read the OP since I already did that once, but I believe he said it would be a series of deadspace pockets. Once you leave the grid, you immediately move onto a new grid with more rocks and more deadspace and more warp/dscan disruption.

You're really trying very hard to find any possible way that a miner might make themselves remotely safe so that you can say the whole idea is trash based on that one point, aren't you?

I'm just trying to find ways to exploit this. And if I can then there needs to be a solution. That is how a consensus is made about a new idea.
Lienzo
Amanuensis
#13 - 2015-02-09 02:32:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Lienzo
I can see some benefit to keeping ore anoms/sigs as is. It would be impractical to tie multiple belt entrances together. The 1M km gap typical of acceleration gates in deadspaces is a trivial distance on the scale of the game, but still a wildly impractical distance to travel under normal impulse. Additionally, with grids spawning on demand, it probably wouldn't be easy to have them mesh into one another.

I don't think the change would affect empire too drastically, aside from rewarding mining groups for their investments. In unsecured k-space and w-space though, it would result in more brazen activities by both groups. In k-space there would be a lot less logging when neuts enter the local intel channel. That in turn will reward persistence, because even scanned down to a single belt deadspace, they'll know they probably have a while before their location is uncovered. It would also dramatically lessen the reliance on metagaming, although that would certainly still be rewarded.

In w-space, nobody will know much of anything, but at least the miners won't be at an automatic d-scan disadvantage. As the type of player that likes to skulk about in cloaked ships and radio in friends, I very much like the idea of following a skittish hauler that is flitting from rock to rock.

I imagine this would also open opportunities for both pirates and anti-pirates to mix it up. I said that I would avoid discussing exploration, but I can't help but think that if there was a high chance for a button to spawn on grids in FW space, it would add some diversity of scenery to those conflicts.

I think, more than anything else, I just want solar systems to feel big. If that bigness has to just be in asteroid fields, then that would be a great start. WTZ PVP just never felt right.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#14 - 2015-02-09 04:37:26 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
I'm not going to go back and read the OP since I already did that once, but I believe he said it would be a series of deadspace pockets. Once you leave the grid, you immediately move onto a new grid with more rocks and more deadspace and more warp/dscan disruption.

You're really trying very hard to find any possible way that a miner might make themselves remotely safe so that you can say the whole idea is trash based on that one point, aren't you?

A miner, even in their 30 m/s barge could very well make themselves safe.

Firstly, grids are 500-600 km diameter in general (grid foo aside). As soon as a miner moves off one grid onto another, they only have to fly for a couple of hundred km to be totally safe under this proposal.

How do they tell when they are off grid? Just jettison something from their cargo and wait until the cargo container disappears off their overview. No container = new grid. Fly a bit. Totally safe.

Secondly, since grids occur in 360 degrees, anyone coming to try to find a miner needs to be lucky enough to pick the direction they flew in. Miss the grid, miss the miner. Total safety.

Very bad idea, not only because of the risk/reward imbalance. Bad idea because the last thing the mining mini game needs is more of the same boring rubbish. Mining needs a total overhaul, not more of the same in total safety.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#15 - 2015-02-09 16:34:15 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
I'm not going to go back and read the OP since I already did that once, but I believe he said it would be a series of deadspace pockets. Once you leave the grid, you immediately move onto a new grid with more rocks and more deadspace and more warp/dscan disruption.

You're really trying very hard to find any possible way that a miner might make themselves remotely safe so that you can say the whole idea is trash based on that one point, aren't you?

A miner, even in their 30 m/s barge could very well make themselves safe.
at the cost of not doing anything productive once their ore bay is full. Moving out beyond any distance as that, it comes down to them being as safe as any mission or complex site.

And I believe the OP mentioned each grid having a warp in point that everyone can access, so it wouldn't be practically possible (assuming the code doesn't **** itself) to hide in perfect safety there.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#16 - 2015-02-09 19:01:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
I love the way that the only thing anyone is latching onto is "miners getting safety" while totally ignoring every other possibility for this idea. Maybe what this community needs is for EVE to have mining removed and begin seeding minerals instead.

I'm not a miner and I, for one, am tired of belts being boring half-circles of floating rocks and would like to see belts worth exploring. A colossal field of floating space-rocks makes a good place to hide interesting things.
Damjan Fox
Fox Industries and Exploration
#17 - 2015-02-09 19:28:53 UTC
I like the idea of spawning every ore type in all of High , Low, Null, but with increased density and size with lower sec status. +1 for that.

Everything else, not so much.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#18 - 2015-02-09 19:48:13 UTC
Damjan Fox wrote:
I like the idea of spawning every ore type in all of High , Low, Null, but with increased density and size with lower sec status. +1 for that.

Everything else, not so much.

I honestly believe that is one of the best options to set up for use-based sov. Otherwise having to outsource your supplies from somewhere else means you can't "use" your space effectively without gimping your capabilities elsewhere.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#19 - 2015-02-09 19:54:43 UTC
Lienzo wrote:
"Infinite" Belts

...


Travel is the best education

We need a way to promote in-belt travel, even at the risk of creating bottlenecks. To this end, we could have all belt grids act like deadspaces. You won't be able to warp directly to your friends in them. Instead, everyone starts at the beacon, but anywhere on that grid. They must then race along to seek out their objective or allies.

This is important, because it makes ore hauling members of the squad really critical. If the group has an orca or a rorqual, they can actually use it inside of the ore belt to tremendous effect. The ability to store or compress lots of ore on-site tremendously increases the value of these investments. Botters having to adapt their scripts would probably be the least significant consequence created by such changes.

Ok, let me see if I understood this.

Each individual grid has a warp in point, so if someone tries to warp to their buddy, they get redirected to that closest warp in point?

Also, the warp disruption and scan inhibiting are not consistent, but random effects?

If someone tries to scan down one of these, will they only see the original beacon, or will they see each grid that has been spawned as options to travel to?
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#20 - 2015-02-09 19:58:41 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
How many bad ideas can we shoe horn into one suggestion?

Let's see here, we've got spread out rocks, so you're farther from the beacon, allowing you to see incoming hositles on grid, allowing you to warp out long before they ever have a chance to make it to you. We've got increased high density ores to drive down market value of minerals. We've got invisible scan inhibitors, so the big bad neuts can't see you mining. Oh, and even if someone gets a cloaky ship on grid with you, they still can't call in support, unless it's also cloaked, because you can't be warped directly to. Be smart enough to seed the beacon with loads of decloak cans, and you really don't even need to worry about cloaked ships, you'll see them coming.

And what's the penalty for not having your mining interrupted? The haulers have to slowboat to pick up the ore!!! Well, they do if they're not smart enough to use a MTU to drag the cans in from 125km away. Oh, you might need 2 MTUs set in a chain for those rocks that are really far away.

I'm going to put in a big, resounding no for this idea.



People like you ar why Eve has hardly changed in 12 years.


Great idea, would add so Much depth the exploration and immersion. I'm going to give a big, resounding, hell yes to this.
12Next page