These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if goo-containing moons were shuffled monthly?

Author
Lili Lu
#61 - 2012-06-07 17:47:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
OP, if this had been in place since the inception of moon mining, in my best original star trek episode Errand of Mercy, klingon grin - "It would have been glorious"Pirate
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#62 - 2012-06-07 17:58:20 UTC
I don't know why I keep finding myself surprised at the lack of effort I see on these forums. Someone comes up with an idea and because it would require fixing a separate boring/broken mechanic they want to give up.

If changing how moon mining works causes more moon probing to be done then change moon probing too be more intuitive and rewarding. Who cares how many broken things need to be fixed. Saying, "Don't change moon minerals spawn/whatever because we would have to use some boring broken mechanic." is just dumb.

Stop giving up so easy people!
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2012-06-07 18:02:55 UTC
moon mineral rotation is the dumbest idea ever

there are 3,960 systems where you can mine moons and they have 171,799 moons between them

hope you enjoy 10x price spikes for every t2 hull/mod

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#64 - 2012-06-07 18:05:01 UTC
imagine only 10 hulks in jita for 5 billion isk each, the bleating will be glorious

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2012-06-07 21:23:12 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
lmfao moon probed in a viator

get out with this stupid idea


This man knows what's up.

Have you ever dropped a tower? Do you know how long it takes for a gun to online? Do you know how many guns go on a standard large harvesting tower? How to configure the hardeners properly?
Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2012-06-07 21:25:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Myr
Also I went moon probing in Solitude the other week for various reasons. There's a decent mix of towerable high sec and low sec, with a bunch of moons up for grabs, because of how terrible the logistics of working in that awful region are.

Seriously, properly probing out Aeter alone would take you an hour or two, and that's only the best system in the region.
Alia Gon'die
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
#67 - 2012-06-07 21:27:45 UTC
The Groundskeeper wrote:
There are several ways to rebalance tech that should be looked at but only dirt-eating simpletons who have never had to scan so much as a constellation, let alone a region every few weeks. And that's before the effect on logisticians who have to unanchor and reanchor hundreds of towers and mods every month or so because some knuckle-dragging chucklepov was a bit jealous but too incompetent to take any tech for himself.


I have had to erect POS towers for moons. It's not something I would like to do every few weeks. I would literally rather cut my own heart out of my chest than have to take down and re-anchor a few hundred towers every month because someone can't be bothered to take his own towers.

Self-appointed forums hallway monitor Ask me about La Maison and what it means for you! http://bit.ly/LTW5gW These wardec rules are not in place for our protection. They're in place for yours.

Alia Gon'die
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
#68 - 2012-06-07 21:29:34 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
I don't know why I keep finding myself surprised at the lack of effort I see on these forums. Someone comes up with an idea and because it would require fixing a separate boring/broken mechanic they want to give up.

If changing how moon mining works causes more moon probing to be done then change moon probing too be more intuitive and rewarding. Who cares how many broken things need to be fixed. Saying, "Don't change moon minerals spawn/whatever because we would have to use some boring broken mechanic." is just dumb.

Stop giving up so easy people!


Marlona, please read this post. This is what would happen with shuffling moons.


Richard Desturned wrote:
moon mineral rotation is the dumbest idea ever

there are 3,960 systems where you can mine moons and they have 171,799 moons between them

hope you enjoy 10x price spikes for every t2 hull/mod

Self-appointed forums hallway monitor Ask me about La Maison and what it means for you! http://bit.ly/LTW5gW These wardec rules are not in place for our protection. They're in place for yours.

Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2012-06-07 21:31:27 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
I don't know why I keep finding myself surprised at the lack of effort I see on these forums. Someone comes up with an idea and because it would require fixing a separate boring/broken mechanic they want to give up.

If changing how moon mining works causes more moon probing to be done then change moon probing too be more intuitive and rewarding. Who cares how many broken things need to be fixed. Saying, "Don't change moon minerals spawn/whatever because we would have to use some boring broken mechanic." is just dumb.

Stop giving up so easy people!


Say this after you've actually maintained a network of POS.

Bernie Nator
Seal Club Six
Plug N Play
#70 - 2012-06-07 21:32:37 UTC
Why not have the deposits in a moon slowly dry up over time? Once the moon is drained, the source is moved to a different moon somewhere in the corresponding security status, but not near the same region so it'll have to be found all over again. You can just say the probe hit a different part of the moon where this resource is far more abundant than previously thought.
Alia Gon'die
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
#71 - 2012-06-07 21:35:16 UTC
Bernie Nator wrote:
Why not have the deposits in a moon slowly dry up over time? Once the moon is drained, the source is moved to a different moon somewhere in the corresponding security status, but not near the same region so it'll have to be found all over again. You can just say the probe hit a different part of the moon where this resource is far more abundant than previously thought.


No, it's still a terrible idea. I think pretty much all goons would much rather have all or the majority of moon materials moved to mineable belts.

Self-appointed forums hallway monitor Ask me about La Maison and what it means for you! http://bit.ly/LTW5gW These wardec rules are not in place for our protection. They're in place for yours.

Svarek
#72 - 2012-06-07 21:35:57 UTC
Svarek wrote:
Eh, well, tbh if you wanted randomized resources or something, CCP could make mineable rogue planets or comets full of resources that appear randomly in systems but move through them and disappear after a short while (if you want to be scientifically accurate, just make them brush the fringe edge, etc)...


I'm just gonna quote this again... not because I'm being narcissistic or anything, as far as I can tell, but it seems to be one of the better solutions suggested so far.

Whoops.

Bernie Nator
Seal Club Six
Plug N Play
#73 - 2012-06-07 21:37:25 UTC
Alia Gon'die wrote:
Bernie Nator wrote:
Why not have the deposits in a moon slowly dry up over time? Once the moon is drained, the source is moved to a different moon somewhere in the corresponding security status, but not near the same region so it'll have to be found all over again. You can just say the probe hit a different part of the moon where this resource is far more abundant than previously thought.


No, it's still a terrible idea. I think pretty much all goons would much rather have all or the majority of moon materials moved to mineable belts.

Oh, so they can use their large numbers to mine it out even faster? Fantastic idea.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2012-06-07 21:37:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
To be fair it's a better idea then OP's one, but still really bad. I'm sure a wormhole-dweller could relate to resisting any suggestion of arbitrary online-offlining of dozens, if not hundreds of towers across several regions. You guys get exasperated over maintaining POSs in one system.
Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2012-06-07 21:41:58 UTC
The concept of non-static moon minerals isn't as dumb as the 'My Viator has two highslots' OP makes it sound. The problem is the fact that the database has never been designed around it, and the concept of desirable moons being points on conflict doesn't work if which moons are desirable changes too rapidly. Add to that the fact that if your intel becomes outdated too rapidly, the effort of your recon group becomes even more of a sisyphean task.

Moon minerals changing on something like a 6-12 month scale could potentially be an interesting mechanic. It would force relocations, rescans, wars, invasions, and such constantly on this scale of a time period (for reference, it takes about a month to take a single region when no one shows up to defend it, simply due to the amount of timers involved). Any shorter, and there'd be such constant flux in what is valuable where that it'd be a crapshoot, and the only point in owning large chunks of space would be the off chance that something valuable turned up in your yard.

CCP has actually stated that they don't like that the main value of owning space is moons, specifically Technetium moons, and are working actively to fix this bottleneck, with ring mining. This is a good thing. A stopgap solution that involves existing mechanics would be something more along the lines of R32 alchemy.

But, no, instead, by all means, tell me more about how you've scanned entire regions in your Viator without a cloak.
MaCoola
Into the Ether
Out of the Blue.
#76 - 2012-06-07 21:42:04 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Stu Pendisdick wrote:

More assertions based on nothing other than personal bias.


I speak with experience that anyone can check. I have managed moon reactor farms, I have orchestrated the scanning of several regions, and I know everything there is to know about the t2 material system. All of this experience is easily verifiable, as I'm the CFO of goonswarm. You, on the other hand, are a noname npc alt who has made serious errors about basic facts of moon mining, poorly lied to cover that up, and have asserted unbelievable and unverifiable claims of experience in response to challenges of your incredibly stupid ideas.

As an actual authority on this issue I can say without fear of contradiction from anyone who actually knows what they're talking about that your claimed experience is a lie, that you have no idea what you're talking about, and are an exceptionally poor liar.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Yes, cause goons are so honest! RollRoll Lie more Goons and CFC lol. I love the idea of monthly or every few months moon goo redistributing. Always have. Of course the power blocs will be against it. It breaks up their stranglehold on 0.0 and gives everyonr else a chance to make some isk. It actually makes Eve a ton better.
Bernie Nator
Seal Club Six
Plug N Play
#77 - 2012-06-07 21:43:16 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
To be fair it's a better idea then OP's one, but still really bad. I'm sure a wormhole-dweller could relate to resisting any suggestion of arbitrary online-offlining of dozens, if not hundreds of towers across several regions. You guys get exasperated over maintaining POSs in one system.

Only those of us living in deep space, and even then we usually have backup fuel stashed away. But even then, we maintain so many defensive modules that having them flicked on and off like a light switch is bound to wreck havoc, especially when the system can't determine which modules it should and shouldn't allow to be online lest it overload the grid.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#78 - 2012-06-07 21:48:17 UTC
Stu Pendisdick wrote:
Sort of a resource depletion concept, but more nasty.

Every month, the database would shuffle randomly the moon goo distribution through out the entirety of New Eden.

Today you have Tech x 2 on your moon, next month you've got carbon, or worse, nothing at all. The month after you'd find yourself swimming in Promethium .

I think it would go a long way towards promoting active PvP and discouraging the nap fests currently found.

It would also keep any dominant alliance from becoming fat and lazy. Constantly chasing a moving target............

It would also solve the "sovereignty mechanics" arguments if you look at it the right way.

No point in holding systems in perpetuity due to the ever-shifting sands of fortune.

Get rid of the Sov requirements altogether.

A wide open free-for-all.

Oh, the carnage!

Twisted


i like it!

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#79 - 2012-06-07 21:49:08 UTC
hey maybe not monthly, 6 monthly perhaps give entities time to capture, then profit from their conquest, but not give any one a perma license to print isk.

Tal

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#80 - 2012-06-07 21:49:31 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
this would be like shuffling of security statuses of systems.... pretty funny but not playable at all.... Because you don't know where will you find yourself tomorrow...


you say this as if its a bad thing dynamic sec status would be awesome!!!!

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.