Player Features and Ideas Discussion

did you read my post

i did the math for you again if you play 2h per day with 20mio per h then you need for a plex

16 days and that with optimal numbers without ganks or other investions

if you consider half a month "a pretty small fraction of the month." ok

i think the normal miner if he dosnt have to much free time mines around 1-2 1/2 h per day
besides 20mio per hour in empire alone without boost holy crap i go to empire and mine there

You know the "hacking game" and the "loot spew" mechanics people keep talking about?

Stick that as the "mining interface".

Try automating those suckers.

So, you want to put something you don't like in one part of the game and slap it onto another part? That's hilarious.

Also, who do you think mines all the trit to keep your ships affordable? Who doesn't really care about gankers banking all your mining ops on all sec levels? Who continues mining day in, day out so that ****** PVPers don't have to do it? Its the bots that keep your limited world perspective running. Remove that part entirely from the game and you lose the very material that keeps it running. Because real people care what happens to their ships and don't continue doing things that others always ruin without thinking about the implications.

Besides, your logic has once again a huge flaw: if botters were to be removed by whatever change to mechanics, and taking into consideration that stupid players don't become less stupid over night, prices would rise sky high and botters would be rentable once again. So, no change at all.

It won't be bit of a problem for bots unless they're using computers from 1980.

Woah, easy there.

I did not mean "make the mining interface a living hell for miners", I simply meant that CCP is apparently capable of making some new UI's that require quite a bit of selective clicking that would be hard to automate.

It would be a lot harder if an automation program had to deal with even a simple "minigame" in order to select and start a mining beam on a new asteroid. Pretty sure you could make it next to impossible as well, just by messing with their ability to deal with patterns and colours.

I suggested it on page 2. And it's not about hating miners. Mining is the single most botted activity in the game, period.

If they want to kill that, then putting loot spew on it would kill bot mining. The "real" miners wouldn't be effected, assuming that there are any.

It would fit the mechanic more than it does data and relic sites, that's for certain. Think old school Asteroids.

no reducing Highsec Minerals would solve nothing, Bots are everywhere

Instead of reducing Highsec Minerals i would rather

-replacing all static belts with small Veldspar asteroids and not mining able Rocks with some Ship wrecks in it
- putting more random Grave sites
-they will respawn every 3h after they are depleted
-making Belts smaller (bigger and fewer Asteroids)
-turning miners to Nomads, moving from system to system scanning for sites for mining

Don't forget that most people who play games are not exactly Einsteins or Hawkings. Having to solve a minigame every time you want to activate your mining laser can be ... straining, to say the least.



And so is the production in our contemporary industry. Repetitive work asks for automation and whatever process changes you do to it, it always condensates down to being a repetitive process.

How do you want to see loot spew on asteroids implemented? They are not exactly wrecks or containers with sophisticated throw out mechanisms.
And how does loot spew not affect real miners? Even with the spew in Data/Relic sites people have been complaining that they miss out on huge parts of the exploits because it spews in weirdest directions and drifts out of range too fast. This would be even worse of a problem with mining barges, which are significantly slower and less agile than CovOps or T3.

Unfortuneately the OP is rather an extreme solution, pretty much burning down your house to stop the birds roosting on the roof.
If CCP were determined to root out bots, then I am sure they would have succeeded by now.
It is more likely that they accept it as part of the overall economy by now.
If not it is not beyond their means to implement some random event that requires a level of thought to deal with.
After all we have Gankers, professing to be on a war against bots who seem to kill a lot more players than automaton. Even when they are begging them to stop in local. So that's not any better a solution.
It would be interesting to know just how many people are actually botting or if it is an urban legend, used to justify questionable behaviour and agendas?
It is not our job to do CCP's for them.
If they find it a problem and they want to fix it, then that's fine.

Or is it just another stealth nerf hisec thread?

I didn't say reduce minerals, I was saying increase them. A LOT. But I like your idea too. I think that:

1.) regular asteroid belts shouldn't run out of ore very easily, but shouldn't have a lot to mine either. So I would make them large and expansive, with lots of large asteroids spaced rather far apart and of a low yield type. Bots would either have to slowboat a lot, fly a venture, or learn to make bookmarks with other ships. Even if they do the last one, they still have lower yield than players.

2.) Instead of +5% and +10% yield types in other areas, there should be +25% and +50% yield types. Asteroid belts could have some of these to make them interesting, but they would be small. +25% would be common in grav sites as well as in asteroid belts of a security status much lower than the ore type. +50% would be common in grav sites much lower in security status than the ore.

3.) Gravimetric sites containing ore should not be scannable with the on-board scanner. Bots can use it. Or maybe some could be scanned with the on-board scanner but they would have ore similar to the belts. The big difference could be deadspace pocket at the cost of smaller asteroids - giving an advantage to venture pilots.

4.) Increase demand for nullsec minerals and decrease demand for tritanium and pyerite. Highsec mining should produce several orders of magnitude less income than deep nullsec mining, given the multiple layers of defense required to sustain nullsec mining, which dramatically reduces its efficiency.

All you people out there who think nullsec mining happens oh so much, I don't think you've really been out there. Most of the people who mine in nullsec do it either because they like mining or because there isn't much else going on at the moment, usually both. For most folks, the amount they mine doesn't even come close to sustaining their industry and they must resort to ISK income sources and drawing minerals from highsec.

I'm sure there are bots that mine in nullsec. They live in large groups and are probably owned by the folks who were running them back when it was easy to start doing because it was a lot safer. Now they have a lot of non-bots who maintain their sovereignty and defend their space. Even those botters probably rely significantly on other income sources though they must be efficient enough to actually be making a profit with the mining operations. They do have a huge advantage though, they were there a long time ago and have their infrastructure all set up. What you don't see is new bots running down to nullsec to start mining.