Except that it automatically repeats, which I’m guessing is Yarda’s point.
it’s not really a contest of skill is it? It’s more of a tedium barrier, an endurance test to see who can keep up the donkey work the longest.
I’m reminded of something Hilmar said in an interview last year, that they wanted to find ways to introduce energy into the time = resource dynamic. Because when time = resource, you incentivize your players to automate (bot) and multibox.
I personally favor minigames as a way to deal with this, though there are ways to blend the game into the rest of the experience to make it more visceral, which make it feel less like a mini game and more a part of the overall experience.
Minigames are a lot easier to develop though, so that’s why I suggest them. (Less development time, suggests CCP would be more likely to do it.)
Note: minigames are generally disfavored by the community. Especially mining, the big nullsec bloc 10+ multiboxed fleets ensure no mining minigame will ever happen.
As far as mining is concerned, I would favor an optional minigame. So it doesn’t remove current gameplay, but if someone is actively mining, they could be rewarded for it.
Example: mining rock: make use of skinning hacking minigame: successful hack: mining laser cycle completes.
Something like that would both make it difficult for both bots and multiboxers to take advantage of.
The net effect of this, is solo mining (and individuals mining in a fleet) efficacy would be brought up, while botters and multiboxers would remain the same, in terms of output. Granted, if the minigames suck, it would just seem tedious, so the developers would need to be careful there.
As for minigames overall, I’ve not heard a lot of disparaging remarks leveled at the hacking minigame. It’s relatively simple, but has enough variety in it to keep people entertained. The worst complaints about it, are when the rng screws you to the point of making the hack impossible.
Perhaps my lack of perception on the matter is just reflective of my bubble though.
Off the top of my head. A lot of these ideas are bad
Most good ideas start off as bad ideas (at least in respect to their incompleteness.) I think it’s pretty terrible when people just jump on an idea because they think it’s bad without trying to sift out the positive aspects of it (assuming there are any.)
High sec anchorable bubbles with ACLs. If you’re a friend you don’t get caught in it. Slow down „not friendly“ trade, make local geography matter more, give something to shoot and bait with. Set up soft tolls.
If I were to take the stance of most people on this forum when responding to ideas, the slew of disparaging remarks for this would certainly be large.
However, I do see what you’re going for there, and there’s some potential benefit.
The challenges you’d have you address is how would people get around in highsec? Jita would almost certainly become useless, and having to jump 10 jumps would be taxing.
One potential solution to dealing with the bubbles, is if players could create / develop their own warp paths, using 3d splines on the system map. Probably also has it’s own complications, but there’s something there.
- Nothing has D-Scan by default. Modular system to customize it.
- As many warp stabs as you want. Each one fitted slows down your warp speed by 50%. Tradeoff: guaranteed warp with slower travel time, easier to catch up to but slippery on grid.
- Allow any ship to be DScan invisible, but through module fitting that has tradeoffs like lock time.
The core of this, seems to be to allow modules to take over core ship functions. Not a terrible concept, though I think this would require further ship balance.
The conceptual idea behind this, seems to be similar to my racing shuttle idea. However, instead of using the module system, what if we’re able to tear into the hull itself in the way you can in the various mechanic games. That could open up new possibilities without needing to be overly concerned with module balance.
Granted, that could open up a whole new can of worms. but the design aspect of it would likely be engaging to a number of people.
Proximity mine deployables, suspect action to shoot them in high sec.
What’s the idea behind this? and how would be be balanced for concord?
In general, I like the thematic idea behind mines, but in practice I recognize they have a lot of gameplay issues. Even in non-highsec areas of space.
Burst warp disruption.
What ship classes are you thinking for this?
Half baked, as they may be, all in all, I can see some promise with those ideas.
I’m not entirely sure how they solve the op’s concern about the game wasting their time though. I guess with the highsec bubbles or mines, the people laying them at least are engaging in an activity that isn’t totally mind numbing. The people traveling though… eh. I can see there being issues unless there were alternative travel methods available.
I’d rather waste the money I put in than continue logging in to stare at the little window for hours at a time.
Not to start the Dscan argument back up again, but the idea of having the audible alert and automatic dscan would literally allow the player to not have to "stare at the little window for hours at a time." Even if we skipped out on the automatiic dscan, but just had the audible alert for new contacts, that would greatly improve the situation.
There is never eliminating the vigilance („tedium“ or „cognitive overload“) of being prey.
Oh I agree, and the vigilance isn’t the issue we were having issues with. making use of dscan to avoid gate camps is quite engaging, which also requires vigilance. It’s the required repetition that makes the gameplay mind numbing.
As I’ve said previously, open world mmo’s will always have an element of time wasting. Just the mere fact there’s travel time instead of instant teleport causes time to pass. But elements around design can be done intelligently, so the activities presented in the game are generally more enjoyable, so the investment of time can feel like time well spent.