No more rocks in pve missions?


Did CCP nerfed the asteroid rocks in pve missions? There were a lot of missions with asteroids to mine and I made three level 1 pve missions in a row which were supposed to have rocks and… nothing!

In particular, “Fair Play - More Bark (2 of 5)” was one of the richest, with:

75x Veldspar, average 45k units each
35x Rich Plagioclase, av. 25k units each
40x Pyroxeres, av. 40k units each

And… nothing…
My overview is well configured so it’s not a problem I couldn’t see the roids…

Was it annonced somewhere by CCP?

1 Like

Yes they did.

Yes it was, it was announced in the patchnotes / announcement blogs for one of the recent patches. You should only need to go back a couple of months to find it.


yep you are right: March 2020 release:

Various mission site locations have had mineable asteroids replaced with cosmetic asteroids. (30/03/2020)

Various might mean that in some of them, asteroids were removed but not all of them…

1 Like

It might, but the intention was to remove spawn-able sources of ore/minerals from the game so I kinda doubt it. I guess there are none left in any mission.

Various combat anomalies have had mineable asteroids replaced with cosmetic asteroids. (30/03/2020)

Just ran a L3 Cargo Delivery and it has veldspar. I would have thought this applies to the probe scanables, like Serpentis Lookout which historically contained Jasp and Hemo. But it lacks detail about whether it is all missions or some. Next time I get Lookout, guess will expand my experience.

I did not think many people mined these anyway. In exchange for Jasp and Hemo, there is the chance of escalation or faction loot. Which is usually faster to obtain and the loot can be worth a lot more.

1 Like

Well this is all sorts of disappointing. I trained up an alt specifically to mine missions with, just in time for them to remove the rocks. What’s the point of that? It’s a nice way to shift gears for a while, and an occasional reward of something different to do for those of us who like PVE on alts. Was this being exploited somehow? Yeah…very disappointing.

Yes, it was being exploited - players would keep a mission with high mineable asteroids active (not complete the objective) so it would reset daily during downtime, giving them deadspace mining sites they could mine repeatably - significantly reducing their competition and risk.

I am 99% sure not all missions have had their asteroids removed; I think they just hit the worst offenders. I saw what appears to be mineable asteroids in a mission this past week (it listed as a veldspar asteroid, anyway) but I didn’t check to see if it was actually mineable, as I was blitzing missions at the time.

1 Like

What’s the point of mining in the first place, let alone mission mining…? (It is a rhetorical question, no need to reply)

It’s not. A rethorical question sis supposed to be on topic, not an obvious troll.

He’s CODE, don’t even bother with him.

The topic is about mining, specifically mining in missions, is it not? Questioning the (admittedly subjective) value of the topic of discussion seems pertinent to me

Actually, I’m not. I forged my mining permit several years ago for fun. I don’t mine, and I have blown up several hulks in my time, though not for ideological reasons. These days I just sit in Jita. Kindly try again

You are not questioning it if it’s a rethorical question.

A rhetorical question is one for which the questioner does not expect a direct answer: in many cases it may be intended to start a discourse, or as a means of putting across the speaker’s or author’s opinion on a topic.

(From Wikipedia)

I was clearly expressing my opinion, and my opinion is that I question the value of mining. That is all

If you are using a rethorical question, then you are not questioning.

It’s Sunday morning and this is going round in circles. Never mind

I would consider Bumblefck’s meaning to have been ‘my opinion is that mining is of questionable value’. Which does make it a rhetorical question - the phrasing of his reply to you is perhaps less clear than it could be, but nonetheless the above opinion is expressed by his rhetorical question.

And my answer is that this is just a troll.

He is not questionning, as he then claims. He is forcing his opinion, that mining should not be done in the first place, on people who think the opposite and have a discussion, assuming this opposite.

The opinion that mining is worth is a premise for the discussion. By disregarding that premise, he is off-topic, thus polluting the discussion.

So he’s just a troll. Which is literally my first answer.

He isn’t disregarding the premise. He is questioning the premise. The argument that missions should have mineable rocks is based on the premise of mining being valuable as an activity. He is allowed to challenge that premise to prove the argument is valid - as a flawed premise invalidates all arguments based upon it.

If mining has value, then there is an argument to be made for mission rocks (and there are also still arguments against mission mining as well) - but if mining has no value, then mission mining is additional without value.

A rhetorical question is the counter to an argument that is begging the question, by directing attention back to the underlying premise and demonstrating an opinion that brings the premise into question.

So: what is the value in mining, that it should be extended not just to asteroids in belts, but also into mission space?

This is actually a great source of discussion.

My answer: mining is how we get minerals to make all those fund PvP ships, so clearly it is necessary. If some people like mixing up activities by mining the rocks in their mission pockets after they clear the rats, I think that is a great way to keep people engaged in sources of necessary-to-PvP resources (loot drops from ship kills + minerals for construction); but it must be balanced against resource deployments appropriate for the security status of the system where the mission is spawned.

Some of the missions that had rocks stripped were producing rocks not native to high sec, for example, or restricted to lower-security sections of high-sec. Removing these rocks helps maintain the risk vs reward structure for high sec, which I consider a healthy change.

No, he is not. He is not allowed to troll the forum.
It’s literally forbidden to derail a thread.

indeed. In another discussion.
Here, it’s just a troll.

What’s more he does not want to discuss, as he just wrote “no need to reply”.
It’s just a plain troll.

Stop defending the trolls.

1 Like