These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

How to *really* fix mining
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#21 - 2012-02-23 21:46:02 UTC
Grumpy Owly wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Scanning sites isn't particularly bottable.


Please can you confirm how you would know this to be true, otherwise that of course it could easier for botters to obtain knowledge of sites faster than a player?

Confirm for me how you know it to be false.

You could probably write a bot to run the scanner interface, but it would be a pretty advanced piece of work.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2012-02-23 21:52:10 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Grumpy Owly wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Scanning sites isn't particularly bottable.


Please can you confirm how you would know this to be true, otherwise that of course it could easier for botters to obtain knowledge of sites faster than a player?

Confirm for me how you know it to be false.

You could probably write a bot to run the scanner interface, but it would be a pretty advanced piece of work.


And so if achieved not only making it faster for botters to use they are now substantially more profitable than regular miners who are impeded by the process as a result, Effectively making the botting issue worse.

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#23 - 2012-02-23 21:53:37 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:

Erm, ok. Single pilot scans down sites. Saves as corp BMs, botsgo to work.

GZ, you added two minutes to the botter's day.


If they are working in a single system they are at a serious disadvantage because the sites don't respawn in the same system they were popped in.

If they are working in multiple systems it's going to add quite a bit more than 2 minutes to their day.

This is all from the *current* anomaly mechanics (barring "improved" nullsec systems that have guaranteed sites).

At the very least if the botters are doing any sort of intensive work they'll need to move around more than they do now (unless they are in one of the previously mentioned nullsec systems where there is no change from current operations).

I'm just not convinced that it is that powerful an argument.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Plyn
Uncharted.
#24 - 2012-02-24 00:52:25 UTC
In order for you to keep the same amount of raw material available after your proposed change as there is currently at any given time, there would have to be a huge huge huge amount of grav sites available all over the place. Calculate the number of currently existing belts in all highsec systems divided by the number of those systems and you will find that it would be quite a statistical anomaly for there to not be several sites in the system. Besides, the person who is doing the scanning can see in the first 15 seconds exactly how many sites exist, and if they are too few for their taste they can immediately move the operation to the next system over.
Previous page12