These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How to utterly demolish bot mining easily
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Titan Andronicus
Rookie Mission Tax Haven
#281 - 2014-05-02 14:38:34 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
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.


I haven't been playing for long, but I have become aware of the mining 'controversy': third-party software auto-mining and human AFK mining. It doesn't happen where I live, but I do swing through a 1.0 system and see the same players in the same belts mining the same +5% asteroids, every day. Whereas I just jump to a bookmarked spot in a cluster of +10% asteroids, gobble those up, and move on.

The problems I can see are:
1. The fast CONCORD response time in a 1.0 system (plus empire navy?) encourages players to think themselves 'safe'.
2. There is a super-abundance of +5% Veldspar and Scordite, which those players I think are botting always go for, despite the proximity of the +10% ones.
3. the above doesn't encourage new players to venture further out where there are additional ores to be mined. And frankly I won't touch low-sec as I don't have the skills to survive. I'd rather buy on the market if there was anything I needed.

Solutions?
From my reading I understand that Ice-harvesting used to the elephant in the room. This was made less easy by randomising the ice field placement? Why not randomise normal asteroid placement within a belt. I shouldn't be able to warp to a bookmarked point in the middle of a cluster day after day, knowing in advance where to go. If there was random placement I'd have to look for what I wanted. So would the bots.

But a human and a bot would, I think, approach that problem differently. And the speed and methods used between warping in, searching for yield, and turning on mining lasers might reveal the bots to CCP security.

I also don't think there should be any +5% or +10% asteroids in a 1.0 system. Just have normal Veldspar there, and increase the richness and abundance towards lower security space. Can't speak for null-space.

The third predictable element is the downtime at 11:00 EVE time, every day, after which the asteroids are all replenished, good as new. This advantages some players and disadvantages other players depending on their local time zones, so some players complain about the belts being completely mined out. Yes, they can look elsewhere, but it's costing them more time compared to players than can log-on immediately after downtime and grab the choicest ores.

30-day skill queue for a 30-day subscription! Many thanks
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#282 - 2014-05-02 14:49:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Nikk Narrel
Odoman Empeer wrote:
He's saying that your idea to attack botting is only attacking high security players. It is ignoring the low sec ishtar bots that can make hundreds of millions an hour bot ratting, which sure beats the hell out of a single bot making 20 million an hour.

All your suggestion does is reduce the base material cost in the galaxy to nilch so that people gathering the base material (Tritanium, Pyerite, Mexallon, Isogen) can't make money off from them.

What you don't seem to understand is that this will have to be balanced with EVERY INDUSTRIAL ENDEAVOR in the game, from ships, to modules, to ammunition. What you are suggesting is that we completely crash the market prices, which will crash the cost of all items on the market except for shiny mods. Why? because it will be cheaper to produce the items.

The overall result will be that TI ships will be affordable, and everything else will be ungodly expensive for high sec players. Think 2008 prices (80 mil for a battleship and 250 mil plexes) mixed with current prices (800 mil for ded invulns, etc).

the price inbalance would be silly (edited because the word I used to mean to slow progress is not appropriate anymore due to common misuse). And you are only nerfing High Sec Mining Bots. You are not nerfing null mining bots in certain large alliances, or bot ratters.

I respect your points.

Boiling down to the base concept, what about flipping the idea over, so we only speed up the mining process to the point where AFK play becomes obsolete.

Specifically, we keep all the other factors intact, demand amounts, transport issues, and relative costs.

Botting exists strictly to take advantage of the time sink aspect of this, so basically what about eliminating that aspect?
I believe automation like botting only becomes attractive when dull and repetitive play exists.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#283 - 2014-05-02 19:54:03 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Where please is mining in High sec low risk? Shocked
Where is it not low-risk? Please tell me. I'm dying to know!

I'll give you the name of one of my many favorite mining systems. This is arguably the most dangerous of them all, but I like it for its danger: Odotte -- nice and safe for the mining portion but there's a tiny danger in hauling the goods out if you're not careful.

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."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#284 - 2014-05-02 20:03:10 UTC
Odoman Empeer wrote:
What you don't seem to understand is that this will have to be balanced with EVERY INDUSTRIAL ENDEAVOR in the game, from ships, to modules, to ammunition.
I'm aware of that. And what it does to the economy would leave it much closer to current Tranquility than Serenity is.

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."
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#285 - 2014-05-02 20:08:37 UTC
Does the OP realise the only way to make mining not profitable is either to mine more to crash the prices or to seed ore/minerals in the economy to again crash the prices?

If the bots are so prevalent as some people claim they are, eliminating them would make mining more profitable which would push people to get less detectable bots to gain on the new El Dorado.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#286 - 2014-05-02 20:11:54 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Does the OP realise
That's what my whole post revolved around. Did you read it? I suspect no, just like the majority of the posters here.

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."
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#287 - 2014-05-02 20:32:14 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Does the OP realise the only way to make mining not profitable is either to mine more to crash the prices or to seed ore/minerals in the economy to again crash the prices?

If the bots are so prevalent as some people claim they are, eliminating them would make mining more profitable which would push people to get less detectable bots to gain on the new El Dorado.

Do you know what happens to mining, if players believe they do not need to devote the time expected currently, but a fraction of that instead?

Adaptation takes place.
Players swoop in, and grab the minerals, even going so far as to promote armed escorts.
Guarding miners was only a failed concept because it was too time consuming to be rewarding.
With mining time reduced to a fraction of it's original, being able to pay off a few buddies so your the only one able to grab the ore is a price of doing business.

The market suddenly finds itself with minerals produced by those not needing to devote such time into sinks.
Without time demands to promote and validate it's use, botting withers.

Can players still plex accounts off of high sec? Sure, just like they always could. The mineral fields are limited as needed.
But bots could not expect to compete in a faster paced environment, where being able to react to more violent competition is more present.

Heck, ninja mining would become more practical, which I doubt is practical to bot.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...