These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

How to utterly demolish bot mining easily

Author
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-02-28 01:11:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Bot mining is extremely common because it is more than possible to mine enough income in highsec to plex the account using a simple computer program that can run the mining operation.

Solution: Make highsec mining not profitable enough to sustain an account all by itself.

Economic reaction: Nearly all highsec bot mining operations will disappear; the majority of remaining highsec bot miners will be characters that are used for other things as well. The only remaining characters devoted entirely to botting will have operators who run other passive income sources as well to suplement their income.

How to accomplish this: Reduce the demand for highsec minerals. Dramatically increase the prevalence of minerals tritanium, pyerite, mexallon, and isogen.

If normal players could mine in highsec enough for their own ships in their off time, then highsec mineral income would plummet. The economy could not sustain lots of bot miners because there simply wouldn't be enough demand for those minerals. A lot of manufacturers would refuse to pay large amounts of ISK for their minerals when they could just go mine them in a short amount of time.

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."

scimichar
Deep Hole Explorers of New Eden
#2 - 2014-02-28 01:26:57 UTC
This would mean more "bot" miners. A normal human miner wouldn't do it if it were not profitable. Therefore all that is left will be the bots. As it is mining makes mere pennies compared to other professions.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#3 - 2014-02-28 01:27:12 UTC
Except then non bot miners also couldn't make an income. And you have just destroyed an entire play style. Industry also becomes worthless since minerals are worthless meaning a 5% profit margin is 1-2 isk. So you have now destroyed a second play style. Oh, and ships become worthless, since they are so cheap to build. So you have destroyed PvP as well since there is no value to the destroyed goods so no-one cares.

Dumb idea.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2014-02-28 01:43:39 UTC
People will still want ships and the industry will still be just as active. All that will change in industry is the price of materials, which will directly affect the price of output. The margin remains the same because it costs the same amount of work and has the same amount of access.

Mining will continue in places outside of highsec. The price of nocxium, zydrine, megacyte, and morphite will not change significantly. The other minerals will become bystanders which the miners will have in excess and will sell to manufacturers who wish to use them.

Mining in highsec will not be very profitable, and it shouldn't be. It takes very little work and is easily done by bots or mostly AFK. It should pay accordingly.

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."

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2014-02-28 01:45:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Oh dear Cthulu no. While it would be nice if mineral prices dropped a bit, I'd rather it was by giving active paying attention miners a way to increase yield through interaction, increasing mineral flow that way. But this idea.... this is impressive in a truly Razzie fashion.

Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

Mining in highsec will not be very profitable, and it shouldn't be. It takes very little work and is easily done by bots or mostly AFK. It should pay accordingly.


It already pays peanuts. Really. 20-25 mil an hour for a highly skilled solo miner actively scanning rocks and adjusting cycle lengths? With less for a partially afk miner? Forget that. You can make quadruple that in FW with the same SP. If someone wants to rot their brain out semi-afk mining for less isk per hour than I can count on my fingers and toes (in millions), then they are welcome to do so.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2014-02-28 01:56:33 UTC
So...destroy the economy.

Riiiiiiight. Roll
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#7 - 2014-02-28 02:07:12 UTC
To be fair, wiping out the economy will stop (some) botting.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#8 - 2014-02-28 02:17:12 UTC
If we want to eliminate or at least heavily discourage bot mining we need to come up with some interactive methods to improve and reward "human" mining that can't easily be replicated by programs.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#9 - 2014-02-28 02:24:30 UTC
He's right. Once the economy is destroyed, no one is having any fun, and everyone goes to play something else, nobody will bot anymore! Wait, that's not right...
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-02-28 02:40:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Anhenka wrote:
It already pays peanuts.

Compared to other sources of safe highsec income it's pretty high, and safe highsec income is generally much higher than it should be anyway. 25 mil an hour is way too much. Newbies would still mine if it were 5 mil an hour.

I'm also interested to hear how you armchair economists have come to the conclusion that it will destroy the EVE economy.

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."

Koffin Nail
Vinnell Corporation
#11 - 2014-02-28 02:43:49 UTC
wrong, wrong and wrong...

want to remove the bots or at least lower the amount of them, increase the difficulty. Take rats from null, put them in empire. Deep null, BS rats that hit like a freight train, eat hammerheads like munchies.

Win/Win miners learn how to tank, and defend, have backup to kill rats. Can't afk without risking loss of ship to rats.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#12 - 2014-02-28 03:04:38 UTC
Koffin Nail wrote:
want to remove the bots or at least lower the amount of them, increase the difficulty.

That would definitely have a noticeable impact.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2014-02-28 03:04:56 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
It already pays peanuts.

Compared to other sources of safe highsec income it's pretty high, and safe highsec income is generally much higher than it should be anyway. 25 mil an hour is way too much. Newbies would still mine if it were 5 mil an hour.

I'm also interested to hear how you armchair economists have come to the conclusion that it will destroy the EVE economy.


Because the cornerstone of eve is minerals. It always has been. Mineral prices go up, so does ship and module and ammo prices. Ships get made, insured, destroyed, isk is created, sent back to the miners, and the cycle continues. Every produced ship in the game is highly based off the current mineral basket cost. Even t2 to a significant degree.

And since apparently you don't know much about the topic you started, I'll lay it out.

The bottleneck in production is Trit and Pyerite. Not nulsec/WH minerals. Those are insanely glutted, and if the majority of highsec miners went to nullsec to mine, the market would be saturated to the point of uselessness.

Caps and supercaps take insanely high amounts of Trit and Pyerite relative to the other minerals. The amount of mining needed to acquire the high end minerals only provides a tiny fraction of the trit needed. Cut out the bottleneck for those minerals and within a few months everyone is flying around in 150 Mil carriers, 300 mil dreadnaughts, and 5 Bil isk Titans.

Nullsec players throw capitals at each other en masse, **** dies but nobody cares cause it's worthless. The sense of value having fled PvP accomplishments, many of those players follow the already reduced miner subclass into deactivating their account, bored with the pointlessness of working to try and kill ships that can be replaced in less time than it took to kill them.

Highsec mission runners flee in terror because suddenly, it costs 5 minutes of ratting to fit a tornado. Suicide ganking thresholds drop to 200 mil worth of non t1 items in a freighter then now costs 100 mil to build, and 30 mil worth of talos's to destroy. Not that it matters, since there's nothing besides faction gear to spend your money on.

Plex's bloom to multiple billions apiece with nothing to spend isk on, mission runners are now unable to plex their account without 8 hours a day grinding. They quit.

All is silent

EVE crumbles.


And this is really not an unrealistic projection.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2014-02-28 03:17:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Anhenka wrote:
The bottleneck in production is Trit and Pyerite. Not nulsec/WH minerals. Those are insanely glutted, and if the majority of highsec miners went to nullsec to mine, the market would be saturated to the point of uselessness.

I'm not arguing where the bottleneck is now, in fact it was sort of the point of my post. My suggestion would turn that bottleneck over to the other minerals.

Highsec miners in general will not go to nullsec to mine. If highsec mining loses profitability they will find another source of income.

I stopped reading your post about there since you clearly don't have even the most basic grasp of EVE economics.

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."

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2014-02-28 03:22:46 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:


I stopped reading your post about there since you clearly don't have even the most basic grasp of EVE economics.



Neither do you, given the fact that you seem to think supply and demand doesn't actually exist.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2014-02-28 03:29:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

I stopped reading your post about there since you clearly don't have even the most basic grasp of EVE economics.



You really don't get it. There is no bottleneck for the other minerals. None at all. If you took the amount of time takes to mine all the minerals for a titan and spent that time mining the high end ores exclusively, you would have literally dozens of titans worth of high end materials. 90% of the time spent mining to build a titan is spent mining for bulk amounts of Tritanium or Pyerite.

A third the current number of miners in eve could supply more high end minerals than all the PvP'rs in eve could manage to lose on a regular basis. Even as it is, it's so easy to mine nullsec ores that it's not even all that much more profitable (assuming equal boosts) per m3 to mine nullsec ores as compared to high sec Scordite.

Edit: A quick look gives me a 188 isk/m3 value for Scordite, and a 214 isk/m3 value for Arkonor.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-02-28 03:54:29 UTC
So then the high end mineral costs should be 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."

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2014-02-28 03:58:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
So then the high end mineral costs should be increased.


Unless you plan on increasing it by an order of magnitde, it would matter not.

Frankly, market is in a pretty comfortable position as it is.

Nullsec ores pay a bit better, but organized nullsec miners get things like Rorqual boosting that highs don't, safety behind walls of blues, and much larger m3 per roid that allows them significantly better overall pay, even when mining veld.

Highsec get safety, and a good place to do industry.
Prices for ships are not too insane relative to most players income.

Increase the amount gained or required from nullsec ores and not much will change, change highsec ores and even nullseccers will spend most of their time mining highsec ores...in nullsec.

TLDR: ****'s not broke, don't try and fix it.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#19 - 2014-02-28 03:58:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
So then the high end mineral costs should be increased.

Then you're just going to make my nullsec miner alts super rich, without solving the problem of bots. It's not a mineral/ore prevalence price that's the heart of the botting problem. It's the mechanics that are jnvolved in actually obtaining the materials.
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2014-02-28 04:06:08 UTC
If you really want to get rid of botting, have a captcha pop up for every strip mining cycle 15 seconds before its done.

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

123Next pageLast page