It’s not.
Almost everything you’re going to loot is 5m3, 10m3, or 100m3 for guns. There is no real variety to how big things are.
Its essential to be able to sort by ISK/m3 due to finite cargo space and the wide variety in volume and value of loot 
for example low value loot might be worth taking if it has high isk/m3 and high value loot might not be worth taking if it has low isk/m3.
But since EVE inventory system is from the previous decade you only get to sort by either volume or value. Fail?
1 Like
This doesn’t exist.
There is a small variety in volume, and it’s stupidly easy to figure out the pattern.
Imo Catalyst expansion should have small yet meaningful additions and changes. A signal of what is to come.
For example an optional column in inventories to sort items by ISK/m3 and upwell refineries no longer fracturing moon chunks before they can be mined. Peace.
Yeah sure, so massmultiboxminers can just lock a single big rock and not having to move, relock, reactivate lasers or do anything on their 20 accounts than one compression every some minutes. Multibox mining is already way too comfortable. I absolutely hope the reduction of the laser cycle is just the first step to add mechanics that demand more inputs per ship to really receive high yields. To a degree that managing more than 2 or 3 ships becomes incredibly stressful.
3 Likes
Neglecting real updates just to spite multiboxers is dumb.
Also
Unfractured moon chunks would differentiate moon mining from belts—and justify XL refineries for huge chunks.
Moon mining already is differentiated from belts.
- unlike belts moons require structure
- unlike belts moons are on a schedule
- unlike belts moons offer different ores for different materials
- moons require different equipment, different skills
Also instead of belts, maybe try ore anomalies?
And if you want large rocks to mine, try the T3 sov mining upgrades, I heard those are huge.
It would not be an “update”, it would be a downgrade.
We don’t need to curb any playstile, just make sure not to further boost it. What this idea would do. And then invent other mechanics that allow single-account players to outperform multiboxers by playing better.
1 Like
If you weren’t still having someone change your diapers, you’d have the mental faculties to understand why we have ISK to Omega conversion.
PLEX is one of CCP’s many tools to combat RMT, but you’d obviously rather have rampant fraud occurring. If you can legitimately buy ISK, then you have less need to participate in RMT. The downside to that is you need some way to prevent all that extra ISK from impacting the economy, so PLEX was created as an ISK sink.
PLEX isn’t going anywhere, little boy.
@Syzygium If you don’t want to make content in fear of multiboxing then everything is going to become an instanced clickfest like Abyssals. But players already have that. But let’s be honest you are just bickering like @FlyingDisk
I’d like to see new content. Just not stupid repetitive low-apm stuff that people will then multibox semi-afk. That is not what I want EVE to be.
I am absolutely open to challenging, high-attention, high-skill, high-knowledge content that requires the players learn and master an activity and then be rewarded with attractive results that are better than just having 10 barges or exhumers cycle their lasers on a big roid and compressing the stuff every 10 minutes.
3 Likes
Pointing your lasers at a big roid and chilling is great content.
But let’s change the DNA of the game so this is no longer a meaningful way to play just to pwn the multiboxers.
1 Like
You were the one suggesting a change. For the worse. So let’s not do that.
1 Like
It seems the new mining site will be instanced and a clickfest but let’s see.
Thinking about this, as an industry player, I spend a lot of time mining. I feel like folks that game the system make my time worth less than it could be and I started thinking about how one could make mining more interactive.
In meatspace mining is hard work and only the top folks get paid a lot and get to wear nice clothes. Usually the miners themselves have to work hard and shorten their lifespans to work the mines. Remembering this is a game and I don’t want to feel like I’m doing real work the analogy definitely doesn’t fit but I think there are ways to make this feel more substantial.
My first thought was around the mining process itself. Right now I sit in an exhumer and point a beam at a rock that is constantly rolling. Why can I extract minerals from a rock that is rolling while I am sitting still? Even worse I can seamlessly move from a set of beams on one side of my exhumer to the other side like nothing ever happened. Why don’t I have to match the rolling of the asteroid? Why do I never accidentally shoot straight through and blow it up? I find I do like the residue mechanic. It is a step in the right direction. Instead of lowering the extracted amount, why doesn’t it fill up the hold with useless material you gotta jet can out at intervals? I know, space magic, but I’m looking for opportunities.
From an interface point of view, say for moderating power to the lasers, a mechanic that could be interesting could be a sort of minigame where there is a horizontal scale with a bar representing, I don’t know: calibration or power, on the screen that aperiodically needs to adjusted to maintain the proper yield. Keeping it on one spot lowers yield, either due to excess residue instead of process-able minerals or not extracting efficiently, depending on how the scale operates.
In PI we have to adjust where substances are extracted from the surface from time to time. If others are extracting resources from the same space it lowers yield. There are so many ways to fix asteroid mining.
2 Likes
They used to like for the SOE ships, Mordus legion, Command destroyers. they only stopped recently it looks like.
That was my point, the recent new batch of ships past few years nobody could test, at least when they stopped allowing 23/7 access to SiSi