These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Mix up the moon minerals
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ilany
Nightingale Enterprises
#1 - 2011-12-29 18:58:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ilany
Outline proposal:
To change the system by limiting the quantitiy of mineral available on each moon. When a deposit is depleted it is reallocated to another moon somewhere else in the cluster. This 'new' deposit is discoverable by probes or by an existing POS.

Example:
A moon in Fountain has 16800 units of Technetium. After a week it is mined out and the server reallocates 16800 units of technetium to a moon in Curse. The empty slot on the moon in Fountain is filled with a desposit of Atmospheric Gas.

Why?
a) Players should have to work for their isk.
b) The availability of certain technology (i.e. Tech 2) should not be controlled by a tiny proportion of the player base who got lucky in 2005 when moon mining was introduced.
c) The market should be more open and competitive. Same principle as T2 blueprint originals.

Fluff explanation
Surface layer desposits have run out. Miners now need to drill deeper into the crust where deposits are smaller and deplete over time.

Mechanics

There are over 200,000 moons in EVE (although not all are accessible or can be mined). Each moon has slots. On some moons each slot is filled, on some only one slot and on some none at all. On those that are filled some have the same moon minerals, but mostly they are different.

My proposal is to mix up all 400,000 (???) available slots and keep mixing them up so no one can pemanently control the supply of any given moon mineral type. The slot on each moon is filled with a fixed 'desposit' and when the deposit is depleted the server reassigns it to a slot on another moon at the next downtime. There are enough 'empty' slots within the system for wiggle room.

The slots would be juggled randomly and a deposit could reappear in the next system or on the other side of EVE, although some sort of mechanism (like with wormholes) would be needed to maintain the value of each 0.0 region (at least roughly).

Obviously there is a risk that contant change will disrupt the flow and disruption will drive up prices (although I think players would adapt quite quickly to this). In any case it can be offset in a number of ways:

  • Increase the number of R64 deposits rotating through the system, and/or
  • Increase the number of available deposits, either by increasing the number of slots on available moons or by increasing the number of moons to mine (perhaps W-space given the proposed limitations on deposit size).
  • Change the way blueprints work: alter the quantities of T2 components required by introducing new flavours of decryptor from the other factions.
  • Reduce the time taken to scan moons (I think this would be a good idea anyway)


On the latter point we would be looking at a revival and development (as a new profession) of the moon scanning role that some of us had to carry out back in 2005.

Desirable effects:
a) Large blobby alliance no longer has monopoly and has to scout regions and fight for rare desposits (or seek alternative sources of isk).

b) Small enterprising corp gets lucky find. Mines 75% of deposit before large blobby alliance finds them and nukes their POS.

c) T2 Materials cannot be controlled by cartels. Prices drop, enabling more players to use T2 ships/mods at reasonable prices.

Thoughts?
Twylla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2011-12-29 19:04:57 UTC
Destabilizing monopolies and shifting the 'map' of resources is a good thing. Drives conflict. Provides opportunities, creates drama when the 'fatties' boss around the 'lil guys' because a tech moon popped up under one of their pos'es. Drives more conflict.

The resource deposits should, however, provide a pretty sizable deposit.. maybe worth somewhere between 14-60 days (arbitrarily). enough to warrant infrastructure, and enough to keep people exploring, but not to the point where it encourages operational complacency.

The trick is to make these materials available enough that the 'run outs' don't create drastic spikes and drops.

~Weapons R&D technician, arms manufacturer, weapons dealer, wormhole project manager, nulsec fleet pilot, armored warfare command/mindlink specialist, thanatos pilot, alliance executor, now retired~

I've done everything. NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!
Ilany
Nightingale Enterprises
#3 - 2011-12-29 19:08:03 UTC
Yes, I'd agree with that.

I was thinking R64 should be smaller (week or two week long deposits) and R32 and below should be double that or triple that (etc), although it need not necessarily be fixed to rarity (some desposits could be larger, some smaller).
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2011-12-29 19:47:37 UTC
I literally can't wait to run around and scan every moon in every system in every region, repeatedly, to see what moon has gotten what material this day, so I can plop down a POS for a whole 2 weeks.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ilany
Nightingale Enterprises
#5 - 2011-12-29 19:54:22 UTC
Err yeah, that's the point. Large alliances who don't work for their isk will have to put in some effort, a bit like everyone else in EVE. No work no play.

Potential hidden advantage of scheme - Goons spend more time scanning moons and less time trolling forums.
Twylla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2011-12-29 19:56:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Twylla
(grand hypothetical) use smalls, they're cheap, easily fueled (especially with the new fuel block chanegs), highly mobile, and nobody really cares if it's easy or not. If that's where the resources and isk are, people will follow.

TBH, I don't necessarily think it's the best idea, but T2 bottlenecks have been a painful point of contention for as long as EVE has existed, even before Goon came along.

At the end of the day, I'll likely stand behind anything that either encourages or forces nullsec alliances to bring in more people out of highsec into the real game, even if its at their expense. There's a lot of room out there for more than just the pewpews for those people who are willing to put in the work for, say, a chance at having a Tech moon for a few weeks.


Life in EVE is fleeting, but renewable.
Resources in EVE should be fleeting, but renewable.

~Weapons R&D technician, arms manufacturer, weapons dealer, wormhole project manager, nulsec fleet pilot, armored warfare command/mindlink specialist, thanatos pilot, alliance executor, now retired~

I've done everything. NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2011-12-29 19:59:00 UTC
There's "work for isk", and then there's "stab myself in the **** for some isk".

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Twylla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2011-12-29 20:00:32 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
There's "work for isk", and then there's "stab myself in the **** for some isk".


I'll stab myself for .01 isk less than you.

If you're not willing to do the work, there's always someone willing to do it for you, for a price.

~Weapons R&D technician, arms manufacturer, weapons dealer, wormhole project manager, nulsec fleet pilot, armored warfare command/mindlink specialist, thanatos pilot, alliance executor, now retired~

I've done everything. NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2011-12-29 20:10:01 UTC
I guess we all know what the next botted activity would become with these changes, then.

Oh boy I can't wait to see even more activities be botted because they're mindboggingly boring. Oh boy oh boy oh boy.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#10 - 2011-12-29 20:53:40 UTC
Or they could just continue down the path they started on when the player owned tax offices were introduced.

- Move moon stuff to PI (removes most of the passiveness of the revenue stream).
- Shuffle planets and or redo distribution on the various types to create "valuable space".
- Have alchemy lab making what was moon-goo be annexes on tax offices. They can be raided/looted when office is reinforced (goldmines should bloody well require guards!).

Small gang roams will take care of the rest and the bloated entities that rely on blob's to keep the moon-ISK flowing will find themselves down at the dole office in no time.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2011-12-29 21:05:04 UTC
End result of this: Billion isk vagabonds.

No.
Twylla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2011-12-29 21:09:08 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
I guess we all know what the next botted activity would become with these changes, then.

Oh boy I can't wait to see even more activities be botted because they're mindboggingly boring. Oh boy oh boy oh boy.



Bots are paying subscribers too!
Why else does CCP not publish ban statistics in regards to botting (especially now that the Incarna messups tanked their sub count)

But this is unrelated. You, however, have made a good point. :)

~Weapons R&D technician, arms manufacturer, weapons dealer, wormhole project manager, nulsec fleet pilot, armored warfare command/mindlink specialist, thanatos pilot, alliance executor, now retired~

I've done everything. NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2011-12-29 21:20:24 UTC
I have suggested making MI (the moon version of PI), but the only reason I can see for moving around the content of moons to create "valuable space" is to try to suck on the moongoo teat before the bigger alliances come rolling to move to these pockets of "valuable space". What's next, moving them around right after the big alliances have moved?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ilany
Nightingale Enterprises
#14 - 2011-12-29 21:58:04 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
End result of this: Billion isk vagabonds.

No.


Dunno how you came to that conclusion. The pupose of this proposal is to cause prices to drop by breaking monopolies.

Incidentally Vagabonds used to cost a lot less than they do now. The reason they cost so much is because someone is artifically inflating the price of the materials used to make them.

Lord Zim wrote:
...the only reason I can see for moving around the content of moons to create "valuable space" is to try to suck on the moongoo teat before the bigger alliances come rolling to move to these pockets of "valuable space". What's next, moving them around right after the big alliances have moved?


That's not what I'm suggesting. The proposal is not to recreate pockets of valuable space in different locations. It is break the monopoly by moving the mineral deposits around frequently so no single organisation can sit on any given moon indefinitely and make a profit from it.

Super-size alliances could chase after the moons all over EVE by scanning them down, but they would move every other week so it would be very resource intensive. I don't think they would do that (which is the point) so instead they would have to find an alternative funding model, like other players (shock horror).
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#15 - 2011-12-29 22:01:25 UTC
You realise that the main impact of depleting and relocating moon minerals would be to shift them all into the hands of larger, better organised alliances, right?

(For this reason, I approve!)

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#16 - 2011-12-29 22:02:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Scatim Helicon
quote is not edit :(

However I'll also point out that a secondary affect would be to discourage territorial conflict because the benefits of taking moons would be too fleeting to justify the expenses of invasion.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2011-12-29 22:43:18 UTC
Ilany wrote:
That's not what I'm suggesting. The proposal is not to recreate pockets of valuable space in different locations. It is break the monopoly by moving the mineral deposits around frequently so no single organisation can sit on any given moon indefinitely and make a profit from it.

Super-size alliances could chase after the moons all over EVE by scanning them down, but they would move every other week so it would be very resource intensive. I don't think they would do that (which is the point) so instead they would have to find an alternative funding model, like other players (shock horror).

Oh, you're really still looking at moving resources around, are you? Well, scatim pointed out the dumbest part of that plan: why the **** should I bother moving around when I can just wait a few weeks and see if I don't get the tech back?

No. Your idea is dumb, dumb, dumb. One of the things that's needed to drive conflict is static resources that don't move. We currently have some of the tech, to get tech you'll have to come and take it, not sit in some backwater system in bumfuck providence (or whateverthefuck is today's ****** region) and wait.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ilany
Nightingale Enterprises
#18 - 2011-12-30 00:47:50 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
You realise that the main impact of depleting and relocating moon minerals would be to shift them all into the hands of larger, better organised alliances, right?


No it woudn't.
a) They are already in the hands of large alliances and have been for years.
b) This proposal would change that situation. Large alliances might be able to persuade their members to go hunting for new deposits, but I would be surprised if anyone had the patience to go scanning every moon in the whole cluster once every other week. This proposal would favour smaller alliances who have a tight grasp of a small area, or enterprising corporations working in low sec.

Lord Zim wrote:
One of the things that's needed to drive conflict is static resources that don't move


Nonsense. This proposal does not diminish the value of a region, it just means you have to control it better and work for your isk like everyone else.

Lord Zim wrote:
Well, scatim pointed out the dumbest part of that plan: why the **** should I bother moving around when I can just wait a few weeks and see if I don't get the tech back?


Probably best if you don't constuct arguments based on comments from another goon. Look at the numbers: The chance of an R64 mineral coming back to the same moon within a reasonable time frame would be very slim.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2011-12-30 01:23:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Ilany wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
One of the things that's needed to drive conflict is static resources that don't move

Nonsense. This proposal does not diminish the value of a region, it just means you have to control it better and work for your isk like everyone else.

Pray tell, why doesn't this proposal diminish the value of a region?

Ilany wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Well, scatim pointed out the dumbest part of that plan: why the **** should I bother moving around when I can just wait a few weeks and see if I don't get the tech back?

Probably best if you don't constuct arguments based on comments from another goon. Look at the numbers: The chance of an R64 mineral coming back to the same moon within a reasonable time frame would be very slim.

We're looking at a few hundred tech moons total in-game, out of 200k. I'm going to ask, again, why the **** should I bother moving around when I can just wait a few weeks and see if I don't get the tech moon back? It's equally as likely, and a metric fucktonne less work than running around and scanning each and every ******* 200k moons in the game (or whatever the **** it was that was moonmineable), so, again:

why
the
****

should I bother running around when the moon'll just bugger off 2 weeks later and I have to hunt through 200k (or whateverthefuck moons are mineable) again?

And for a more common scenario: good luck maintaining f.ex a sylramic fibers chain (yes, from scratch) over an extended period of time without committing suicide because it's such a mindnumbing chore compared to the return on investment and time spent, because your moon minerals ******* move all over the ******* place.

I mean, come on, does it really have to be said by someone not in goonswarm for you to realize that this is a fuckstupid idea?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#20 - 2011-12-30 01:26:20 UTC
Space is not equal. Moons help emphasize this.

Get over it or get a moon for yourself.
12Next page