You are either AFK and accept the risks that come with it or play actively. No ■■■■■■■■ like this. It would decrease the downsides of AFK-gameplay and make it more common.
That is what the OP is about though. Do you not even understand your own proposal? Your proposal is to change the consequences of being AFK or semi-AFK.
Making ISK is okay while being AFK.
Imposing consequences on those who are making ISK while AFK is “lame”.
Then you argue that any all criticism is irrelevant if it does not first show that being AFK is bad. And ironically you were one of the biggest whiners in the AFK cloaking thread recently. Whining and whining and whining about AFK cloakers.
No it isn’t. It is about making AFK/semi-AFK less risky. Reducing risk, which is a function of player choice, is not a good thing in and of itself. Unless this comes with sufficient penalties the idea is bad.
This should be a high slot module so it automatically dings mining output. You can use it, but you lose a mining laser right off the bat. At a minimum.
But since you refuse to discuss this, this thread is just a dumpster fire.
@ISD_Buldath @ISD_Chanisa_Nemes guys…what the heck, the OP is simply trolling at this point. He refuses to discuss the module in question.
Both matter. When they are not being ganked they are injecting resources into the game. Which is fine if they want to do it either AFK or semi-AFK, but then they face higher risk. This reduces that risk. It needs to come with a cost at the very least. It needs to impose a cost such that mining output is lower than that of a tanked procurer/skiff…which is the current option for low risk AFK/semi-AFK mining.
What a freaking dumpster fire of thread…
1 Like
No. But it will have an effect on the in game market. Holy crap. 
1 Like
It doesn’t change anything at all though. If someone is afk then they’re afk even if they get a warning to return to the keyboard quickly. They’ll merely be there to watch their ship die because unless you arrive within 2 seconds of this warning it’s too late. Average gankers will have you scrammed and ready to die before then.
It promotes being afk more only to return for the loss of ship.
Now tell me how it doesn’t?
Well I suppose if you are in a busy system and trying to mine this thing will drive you nuts in that unless you blue up everyone, then the darn thing will be going off all the time meaning you won’t be AFK because every time some guy passes through it will go off and scare the poor AFK miner into looking at his screen.
Which would defeat the purpose of the module. In low or null it would only go crazy faster. Eventually it’ll start being a game of how many times can we trigger the alarm and then the ganking begins.
I’m in total shock the suggestion is being debated after all this time and you’ve actually started to think through how it would work.
As you can see, it wouldn’t be that OP.
I had it monitoring Local because I wanted to see some kind of pre-fight engagement with the game.
However, I’ve decided that Local is OP (could you imagine the tears if it didn’t exist and someone asked for it to be introduced) and this module would make it moreso.
As such, my preference now is that the module doesn’t monitor Local.
So the module would only monitor D-scan and Overview. It wouldn’t work whilst cloaked, it wouldn’t work within 5000km of a gate or WH and it wouldn’t work on ships that are in a warp bubble.
This eliminates most of the downsides.
@Teckos_Pech effect on market was acknowledged as soon as it came up, 11 days ago – “the market balances itself” (link: The AFK module)
If you had a module like this, I would personally find wherever you were mining or ratting and you wouldn’t get a single second of AFK. Ever.
4 Likes
Nibbled on a few off topic Posts, Found them distasteful. Removed them.
Still here!
1 Like
Change of title because some people can’t get their heads past the idea of AFK being an inevitable part of the game. Top post largely rewritten. Module no longer tracks local and I cannot see how corps can abuse it.
You treat this as a foregone conclusion. It’s not. That is the fundamental flaw to your argument.
No part of Eve should encourage, enable, or provide benefit to a player who is AFK. You treat it as an inevitable result, when it should be treated as the symptom of a problem.
That is of course my opinion. And you are entitled to yours. But I sincerely doubt you’ll find much support for your opinion. For my part, I find your fundamental position flawed and thus your suggestion bad.
4 Likes
No part of Eve should encourage, enable, or provide benefit to a player who is AFK.
The thing about opinions is everyone has one.
But that means zero in a debate. If you can say how getting rid of mining, PI and markets will make the game better, then and only then does your opinion have value.
On the contrary. Opinions are open to being changed. I’ve had my opinions changed on many things.
An opinion is merely a current belief based on current knowledge. The OP’s welcomed to try and change my opinion, however in this aspect I do not believe additional information knowledge or perspective will sufficiently impact my opinion.
Just as I fully expect that the OP will not be swayed by arguments against his opinion.
You can still debate an opinion. You just can’t expect someone else to accept that debate as gospel.
If you can’t justify your opinion then I couldn’t care less what it is.
From the top post:
Some people don’t like the idea of others benefitting whilst AFK. To them I say “Then delete mining from the game. Also delete PI and markets whilst you’re at it. They’re all AFK activities.”
The only time AFK matters is when it damages gameplay for other players
Feel free to try and produce a counterargument.
This does not happen because we are in pods and we control our ships with our brains vs. punching buttons, keypads, etc.
I will again reiterate my complaints as they have not changed much…
- We already have a valid method for mining AFK/semi-AFK with reduced risk of being ganked while AFK/semi-AFK.
- Going AFK is an inherently risky activity and as such, it should carry with it…risk. Crazy I know, but if you are not going to pay attention in EVE you run a real risk of losing your stuff.
- This module needs to be no better, and likely worse than the option in 1. Injecting resources into the game while either AFK/Semi-AFK is fine…but only so long as it carries sufficient risk so as to not cause problems with the market.
This final point needs additional commentary. Yes, the market will tend to sort itself out. However, this does not mean that any and all changes are good/desirable. Clearly the case of the changes to carrier/super ratting was not good in that it ran a risk of ratcheting up the inflation rate considerably. The subsequent changes to address it were also not desirable, IMO, in that they were a ham handed nerf to the overall combat capability to carriers/supers which was not an obvious issue.
Indeed…and this is what happens with the market. If this is actually better mining in that the output/effort is better and AFK/semi-AFK mining increases and increases the flow of minerals onto the market which can adversely impact thos who do not AFK/semi-AFK mine.
And again, I have no issue of people benefitting while AFK or semi-AFK. I just think that generally it is a risky option and should remain that way. It should definitely not surpass the current methods of mitigating risk while semi-AFK mining (tanked procurer/skiff)…which leads to the question of, if there is a good current option why should we add this module.
Not a complaint and “valid” is a meaningless criterion.
Going AFK is an inherently risky activity and as such, it should carry with it…risk.
Another meaningless statement, except in terms of game design. It’s terrible game design which guarantees boring play for miners, arbitrary deaths and mining ships which just sit there in fights.
I can only guess your third point is talking about the effect on the market.
Now, because the suggestion will make mining less boring and stressful, mining will become more popular. It’s the same if you make PvE more interesting, or PvP.
Ore/gas prices will fall, around 25% I expect.
And I say “So what?”
More minerals/gas on the market can be easily compensated for by nerfing extraction rates.
You have one that mining is boring. But…
This is a thread ending statement. You are not here for discussion anymore.
It’s over now. There is no salvaging this anymore. They’ve even decided to change the OP to a fiction instead of a suggestion. They’ve even decided that mining is boring for everybody regardless of contradiction.
Partially because we’re no longer discussing afk…
Partially because base information is incorrect.
Mainly because now you don’t have choice.
3 Likes
The whole thing is a joke…even ISD has shown themselves to be jokes. The OP is trolling his own thread and won’t discuss the his own idea. Just stop responding and the thread will lock in 3 months. We can’t coun’t on ISD to police the forums anymore. Especially Buldath.
2 Likes