Mining AFK style to fix AFK mining?

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

Long story short, everyone who doesn’t mine worries about those that do, let’s fix it and give support to the ideal.

Long version of story;
Working within the mechanics of the legacy code is the ONLY solution that I think will work, with that in mind I present this:

Change belt mining to be likened to PI, no longer will belt mining be a thing, this does the following changes that have been an ongoing on the forums.

  1. Get rid of the need for NPC strip mining belts as a thing.

  2. Get rid of ganks in belts as this been a thing so beaten on the forums that it’s not a beaten horse it’s just pieces of the horse.

By eliminating belt mining all together this will make it harder for the bots because no static belt, now people will have to mine at moon mining operations, anoms, and missions.

Take some, give some:
People seem to get chapped in the backside over “AFK” so in order to fix it, it now is AFK, how this works is similar to PI as it is now, resources shall be available just like belts, only instead of PI resources mined it is ore

Each account that is online can have a mining operation going planet side, go offline and so does your mining activities.

How much?
This will depend on how much upgrades you do, your skills, and rigs to install.

Mining amount (yields), will be cycled in 15 min increments till a maximum of your storage capacity, a good target is 60,000 m3 (Miasmos), up to 180,000 m3 say an orca load.
Now everyone can mine AFK while online and now everyone is free to roam, only having to stop to go pick up ore once it’s at capacity.

Those that choose to mine at anomalies, missions, and moons can still have the joy of mining asteroids the way it is, but will be unable to fire up the facilities planetside because hey ‘your skill levels are at maximum capacity’ making it either or.

So what this solves is belt ganks, people upset at AFK miners, everyone can do it so everyone gets ore, don’t like the fact that more ore will flood the markets, tough, you can’t have the good with the bad.

Gankers will be sadden by no longer ganking people in belts, too bad, you can still gank at other locations including customs stations when people come to pick up ore.

SPREAD THE ISK
you can get ore from space mining (tax free), OR planet side with less gank possibility and the joy of truly AFK but must pay the customs tax currently set by the owners of customs stations.

So now a guy with 1,000,000,000 accounts can either have his fleet mining elsewhere such as a moon, anomalies, missions, out of sight, out of mind Or pay the taxes to export ore from a planet and fly cargo ships to fetch his ore, but wait it gets better, everyone can compete with that Multiboxing account guy because hey, everyone can AFK.

Ore yields can be on a percentage based upon sec location

1.0 lower yields per cycle
-1.0 faster cycles, more ore!

Please, I mine, I’d really, really, really, would like to AFK it and pay my taxes then to have to find asteroids to mine, everyone wins something, everyone loses something.

2

I’m quite new to all this, but this sounds like a rather silly idea. Surely the entire point of the game is that industrial actions take time and effort and come with a certain risk that requires an at least minimal amount of attention to negate?

Completely AFKing and getting valuable resources without any risk would make a big chunk of the game totally redundant, wouldn’t it?

8 Likes
3

It is silly to me, but so many worry about what others do and keep spamming with nerf post for mining, reminding me of the Rush song the trees https://youtu.be/8_D0wkLyCXE

1 Like
4

Ahhh… Rush-my only weakness. I completely retract any argument I had towards this topic and fully endorse whatever action you see fit to pursue :smiley:

1 Like
5

I’ll give odds of 2:1 that CCP would make it even more of a clickfest than PI. :evil:

1 Like
6

Couldn’t they just make it use consumables like explosives of various grades and then you hoover the rocks and laser them later.

7

But then I wouldn’t be able to enjoy using my Mach to play space pinball with the mining bot fleets…

1 Like
8

Maybe…just maybe the semi-AFK nature of [belt] mining is a feature not a bug?

1 Like
9

Or a mining minigame on activating laser on a rock, to reduce afk and potentially also botting.

I dont think passive ore introduction via PI system would be good for EVEs economy, and the reduction in active miners in space would reduce instance of PvP.

10

Didn’t CCP just finish a major effort to essentially do the reverse of this idea for moon mining by removing passive accumulation of resources and put mining ships back into space to harvest the asteroids created by a Refinery?

Why would they want to remove a major place for player interaction?

Besides, CCP already seems to be making inroads against the AFK miners with the new uber-NPCs that are in the NPC mining fleets and being deployed by FOBs in highsec.

The trend seems to be to make mining more active, not more passive. If only CCP had the devpower to do the same for PI.

4 Likes
11

In my opinion the only way to negate afk mining and botting is to add more cimplexity to mining. Like adding mid slot non-auto use module which increases yeld.
Some way to overheat mining lazers. Then you should track heat levels to not burn them.
Also damaging clouds around high level asteroids like mercoxit has would make rorqual botting extremelly hard. Since drone in those cloud woul pop.

12

Looking @Piugattuk and SMH

NO!! :roll_eyes:

@zzlzz_TheZ The clouds would make mining quite interesting, yes. :thinking::smiling_imp:

13

To be fair, Belts are a poor mechanic. You could remove belts and put a null/ice belt style anom system into every system, with a slightly random respawn timer which varies from system to system depending on how many belts it currently has.
‘Good’ systems could have several up at the same time, poor systems would only have one on a slower respawn timer.

And that would remove the belt issues of timezones meaning that you log on in a poor timezone and you have to take the scraps that are left simply because someone got there 12 hours before you.

Keeps mechanic of actually mining the same, but removes the bad part of belts.

4 Likes
14

NO NO NO!! If anything you need belts, each one divided by a static number. Say theres 12 belts you have 4 anoms, so 1/3, that spawn at random intervals at random old belt locations. Seeing as the static belts are preloaded into the system you just randomly have a fraction of them respawn at the old locations with the same amount of ore in each. Take the daily respawn mechanic and apply it to each belt for each respawn. Respawns being 4 hours up to daily with the same amount of ore respawned as usual.

It would make static belts semi static but always variations based on random timers of 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20 and 24 hour timers. But amounts to the same ore in each system daily due to the same respawn rates.

15

Uh, no, you don’t need belts. You need ore available relatively easily in similar quantities overall yes, but you don’t need them at static locations or with static types & amounts of ore. They should still have the same beacon yes and not end up on the overcrowded system scanner, but static locations simply aren’t needed and remove the value of the smaller but faster mining options for getting further away ore.

Some kind of despawn mechanic once the ore spawn is below 50-25% would also be good so you can’t leave a single rock to troll people in the next timezone also. And explainable using sensible physics as well.

1 Like
16

By using the same locations its easier on the devs to program and makes it relatively random, now given smaller belt systems then the anom style would be preferable, while limiting botters or afkers from finding new belts. Using a random 4-24 hour respawn mechanic means only people actually in system at the time will see a new spawn, regardless of location.

im also not suggesting belts as static sigs either but anoms to replace them on a fractional system, like 1 anom for every 3 or 4 regular belts but with the same quantity of ore in the anom as normal with the same distribution.

I actually like the low ore respawn idea. Perhaps a mechanic where as you get below a certain amount there is a chance that each roid popping would cause a respawn, where the fewer roids that are left the greater the chance becomes.

Ive argued this point and made an old forum post idea many moons ago regarding the removal of static belts for anom style signatures before.

Its kind of a ruddy work around looking back at it now lol but heres the OP Archived idea

In the end its quite similar to reduce or remove static belts. CCP has implemented a lot of it through NPC mining fleets to reduce the quantity of high sec ores in higher sec systems already. Much to everyones chagrin and my entire amusement. But yes I agree we dont need static belts at all. Removing them in favor of larger more random spawned anoms would do the trick in a lot of cases. I would suggest though only doing this in .8s and below and leaving static belts in .9s and 1.0s for the NPC miners and players to compete in.

17

My thought was actually once it gets below the threshold it starts a hidden timer, and each roid you mine past that point accelerates the timer by a certain amount (Maybe based on volume mined rather than number). This means if you mine fast you’ll clear the whole belt, not have it magically vanish on you, while if you mine slow and take breaks it will vanish some ore on you. But mainly so you can’t troll people hours later, since that’s the main problem with the static belts.

I also don’t think CCP realised how the NPC miners would deplete the belts, given they also are ripping NPC null belts apart like no-ones business as well, and a lot of the low sec belts.

18

Some ideas in this forums are so stupid I can only read the first few sentences and then it is already clear, that no matter what else is in the post, it has not even remotely a chance to make it any better anymore.

This is one of those ideas.

3 Likes
19

Tbh I wouldnt care much if it just vanished or depleted quickly, as people will complain either way really if its not 100% like they think it should be volume wise. Yeah trolling people like that has always been an ore anom thing. The good big high sec ore sigs youd leave one omber in it. Used to chaff me something awful for a while.

I do think they knew and likely wanted it tbh. Forces movement and creative thought in high sec. Though I do wonder about the null and low belt changes as well really. But high sec, from what Ive seen, Im quite impressed with the changes.

20

You are correct. Fixing botting by streamlining the AFK process so everyone is an AFK miner is a joke, and i’m waiting to hear the punchline.

3 Likes