A very simple and basic thing occurred to me as a possible solution for the issue of bots. Before I get into it I’d like to start with a historical example themed for the season and hopefully that will help better explain my idea.

This isn’t an article for theological apologetics, but rather to explain the true historical aspect of the Holiday. You may believe what you want concerning the religion, but let’s keep history historical. Around this time of year you always get these obnoxious try hard pseudo intellectual types spouting garbage by copy/pasting some impotent infantile gibberish off of some scorned not entirely historical blog concerning the origin and meaning of Christmas.

“Jesus wasn’t born on December 25th and Christmas is the pagan holiday of Winter!”

Stay on target…stay on target…

A Christmas Story

From the accounts of Scripture we can assume he was more than likely born in the spring or summer. So the historical Church knew Jesus wasn’t born on December 25th. So how did it happen that Christmas got moved to December 25th? Well the early Christian community lived in a world that was vastly pagan. Pagan sacrifices to this and that got were common place and one of the major Pagan holidays landed on December 25th. Some of the Christians would often do their Christianly duties and Church going and then go have fun at the pagan holidays taking part in events that didn’t exactly mesh with Christian theology. In an attempt to make the followers choose, either Christian or pagan, they placed Christmas on December 25th. You can’t be in two places at once. So in effect, Christianity attempted to replace paganism, not merge with it as some like to argue quoting out of the DaVinci code. There are other things I can get into such as the misconception of Constantine’s role at the Council of Nicea and other things.

Replacing bots with something better

So back to Eve. The question is, why do people bot? Why do they have mining bots for example? Because mining sucks. It’s boring. You sit there and zap rocks for hours and hours. It’s WORK. How do we stop botting? Well CCP has done a wonderful job of curtailing it but the bot makers will always adapt and the bot users will always be there shelling out the cash in order to make their Eve mining more bearable.

Now what else can be done to stop this? Well we can take a page out of CCP’s method of curtailing RMTing; PLEX. You’ve all seen the advertisements: ” Why take risk with 3rd parties that over charge when you can buy PLEX?” And that’s a good argument. CCP provides a reliable alternative that gives the players what they want.

Introducing the Peasant

But what is the bot alternative? Why a bot of course! That’s right, CCP should make mining bots for us. Well not exactly. Instead of a program that flies a Hulk and zaps rocks, and docks up any time someone enters local, i’m thinking of something else based off of the siphon units that came with the latest expansion that adds further interaction between players. Going with the “farms and fields” concept, we can refer to this “siphon mining unit” as ‘the peasant.”

Well the peasant would fulfill a similar role as the medieval counterpart as a semi passive income source. These peasants will be deployable objects that are customizable in their fit. You would deploy it in an asteroid field and “activate it.” Upon activation it would be stuck in place for the period of an hour or whatever would be agreeable for the developers, in which you cannot move it.

This presents us with interesting scenarios. If the system is empty of enemies, a miner can do his job faster and go on to do “fun things” in Eve. At the same time it also provides targets for pvpers. Small frigate and cruiser gangs can go roaming and striking the income of their enemies very directly. The defending side will have to form up its own defensive fleet in order to protect their peasants thus interacting further with would be attackers.

Of course I understand that there would be other aspects to balance. The peasant would have to be effective/cheap enough to be a viable alternative to botting. Yet at the same time it still needs to be worth something to motivate the hunters to go out and go after these things. Having them be customizable means they will have loot to drop. We also have to see if we want to have new skills involved or co opt older ones from the already existing system.

In conclusion and beyond

So by providing a viable and attractive alternative, and easing the grind of the Eve miner, we can dwindle the number of bots in Eve as well as introducing new ways for players to interact with one another. Furthermore, if we are to adopt the “peasant” into the Eve universe, the results may help us develop ways to add further interaction between players by perhaps further modifying or even replacing the current pos/moon equation

– Seraph IX Basarab


  1. Loot Fairy

    2 Gevlon articles in 24 hours? Wow

    December 18, 2013 at 10:55 Reply
    1. Mike

      Amazingly not a goblin article…

      December 18, 2013 at 19:23 Reply
  2. Adamski

    just fuck off with this shit.

    December 18, 2013 at 11:22 Reply
  3. CCP

    I dont even read gevlon articles any more. Just the comment section.

    December 18, 2013 at 11:23 Reply
  4. JIeoH Mocc

    Gevlon go back to WoW

    December 18, 2013 at 11:28 Reply
  5. GrouchyOldGamer

    Making botting easier – erm no.

    I want more people in space not everyone docked out with their bots mining for them.

    December 18, 2013 at 11:39 Reply
  6. WilliamMays

    “…. in order to make their Eve mining more bearable.” I see what you did there

    So, you want to turn mining into a faster, freighter sized PI type game? cuz PI has lead to so many quality targets and defense fleets

    Moreso in the case of null sec, but still in low and hi sec, changes in mining mechanics will mean nothing until corps and alliances have some real benefit from the act of mining. Mittens or Shadoo (insert whatever leader, small or large, here) will not be calling for miners to get to the belts and pvpers to keep the region clear so they can continue killing rocks, until that local mining op creates something better than what can more easily be imported from jita.

    I for one would love for my mining fleet to be the bait which brings roaming gangs into the clutches of our pvp fleets, but that will not happen until we have some kind of balance where the bears have a chance of survival, based on how well their protection performs. As it is now, most gangs that are going after miners, are not looking for a real pvp engagement; they are simply looking for easy kills. They typically run from any real defense, and the miners typically run because holding the attention of a defense fleet is not likely when they sit and do nothing for hours. In my opinion, this would change if your corp/alliance needed (or at least wanted) THIS ore, from THIS belt, in YOUR system.

    December 18, 2013 at 11:39 Reply
    1. Seraph IX Basarab

      First off I don’t think that the entirety of Eve revolves around the big 0.0 leaders. As for the rest, I agree completely. Rocks need to have more value for there to be fights over them.

      December 18, 2013 at 18:37 Reply
      1. WilliamMays

        But it needs to be some value other than isk. Nobody gives a fuck about isk; it can be earned so many different ways, so easily. It also needs to be something different than standard minerals that can just be imported.

        People working together is good on any scale; with current mechanics there is near zero reason for people to work together mining. In fact, you are typically best off keeping it smaller and quiet as possible, in order to decrease the chance of pvp. That’s just bad mechanics.

        December 18, 2013 at 23:24 Reply
        1. Seraph IX Basarab

          Alright, all the people who don’t care about isk, send it to me πŸ˜‰

          December 20, 2013 at 08:53 Reply
    2. A proper suicide ganking squad operates more like a cruise missile than a gang. You have only the tiniest window in which to stop the gank – it’s virtually impossible. The only two defenses that will protect miners from us are the Procurer and the Skiff.

      December 19, 2013 at 04:16 Reply
      1. WilliamMays

        I couldn’t agree with you more. In hi sec there is nearly nothing you can do. I’m sure there are some people who can come up with some crazy methods to use hulks as bait, and decloak their 20 man falcon gang. Have fun with it, but nobody will do that every time they mine. In low and null, a hulk in a pvp engagement…..well everyone reading is already laughing.

        Hulks are supposed to be the king of mining yield because they are supposed to be supported by a fleet. I think they should be reworked so that they can fit a BS EHP sized tank so they live long enough to receive reps, but have horrible shield and cap recharge rates, so that their local tank is weaker than the DPS from a hi sec frigate rat. This would likely require reworking mining laser cap usage, and the cap of the other barges/exhumers too. Also, remove the hulk and covetor drone bays; other fleet members can do better at every job a drone does anyway. It’s a fleet mining ship, let it rely on the fleet for all it’s non-mining needs.

        BUT BUT BUT….
        #1 the yield on other barges and exhumers might need their yield reduced to make the tradeoffs balanced

        #2 changing the ships before changing the goals of mining fleets, would be very bad

        December 19, 2013 at 10:00 Reply
        1. WilliamMays

          I forgot, make hulks align sloooooow enough that the mining fleet is committed, since its less likely to get away from interceptors.

          Yes, I like high risk high reward for group activities.

          December 19, 2013 at 10:12 Reply
  7. Ciaphas Cyne

    i dont see any problem with a mobile mining unit

    December 18, 2013 at 11:54 Reply
  8. Jose G. Garcia

    Thanks for the History lesson, next you’re going to tell us there is no Santa Claus. I dive into Eve to forget about my daily troubles and flying around a beautiful space scenery in a flame throwing mining barge on my own or with Corp mates brings confort to my soul. and if I felt it to be monotonous I will move on to other things that this game offers. that is the Liberty you have in Eve. if there are claims too many drones can crash a server, how will it be when everyone and their brother has bots wacking rocks??…. The spirit of Christmas is of Peace, Love and Hope………………..Merry Christmas to all.

    December 18, 2013 at 12:18 Reply
  9. Aud

    Coming from a primarily industrial alliance in a primarily military coalition, I think this is a great idea. In fact, an excellent way to balance this would be to prevent it from being anchored in hisec at all.

    Hisec is, in comparison to low and null, very safe for miners. If you’re flying a skiff or procurer, there is virtually no risk at all, as nobody is going to commit enough firepower to pop your lone barge unless you have a ton of plex in the cargohold. Hisec mining doesn’t need an easy button, it IS the easy button.

    However, alliances in low and null don’t have this advantage. I’ve seen a single barge have an entire fleet of blops battleships dropped on it just because someone could. Low and null could use a little support in the industrial department.

    Of course, other balancing mechanics would have to be in place. In my head, the following ideas make sense, but I’m sure someone can see a reason why this would need to be different (In which case I’d love to hear it):

    1. Restriction to 0.4 or lower security space
    2. Very large size. Like, POS tower size. People shouldn’t be able to fill their cargohold with these things and scoop them at will, it should require some well thought out logistics to properly farm belts with them.
    3. Low yeild. If they can out mine a mining barge, mining barges will become useless in favor of cargo-expander fitted industrial ships.
    4. Small ore holds. As GrouchyOldGamer pointed out, this would be a way for people to just stay hiding. If someone is going to take advantage of these, they need to be active.

    With those in place, you could effectively farm a system while actually increasing player increasing player involvement. You’ll be undocked and running between belts to collect ore instead of sitting for a mindnumbing amount of time pressing F1 and shooting rocks. Properly balanced, you would be increasing the possible production of a single pilot while also increasing how much they have to work for it. People could farm as many belts as they wanted, but after a point they would reach diminishing returns as their ore collectors fill up before they can get back to it.

    For all you hunters out there, this would mean vulnerable structures that only have miners guarding them and industrial pilots paying more attention to scooping ore than what’s going on in local πŸ˜‰

    I’m interested to hear the thoughts of others regarding this.

    December 18, 2013 at 12:21 Reply
    1. StMick

      Hi-sec isn’t safe for miners at all. Look at the stats; There are hundreds of HS miners ganked every day. Local in HS is no help to find dedicated throwaway gank accounts and anyone that claims that null-sec isn’t safe for mining in has clearly never lived there.

      Null-sec mining is piss-easy in systems you control, a couple of bubbles and toons watching the fleet in belt and nothing can touch you. The only issue is convincing anyone to actually do it rather than shooting each other (mandatory mining ops seem to be the standard method).

      Anything making afk (or in this case, afb, away from belt) money making easier to do is a Bad Thing ™ and won’t be implemented by CCP as they are in the ongoing process of nerfing anything that does this at the moment (eg moon income) and this suggestion would reduce the risk to the miner to almost zero as they were no longer a static target. This is turn would reduce the turnover of ships in HS, which would deflate the market and make mining less profitable anyway.

      Non starter, sorry.

      December 18, 2013 at 13:02 Reply
  10. jay

    are you high? seriously!

    December 18, 2013 at 12:22 Reply
  11. StMick

    We’ve already got mining bots, they are called new hi-sec players. Big corporations tell them where to mine and send a mid sp chap in an Orca to afk boost them. Nothing needs to change in order to make you more money Goblin, just get some friends instead.

    December 18, 2013 at 12:27 Reply
  12. LaLoLa

    Can someone behead this fool? THis Beretard guy is a waste of breathable air

    December 18, 2013 at 12:30 Reply
    1. Seraph IX Basarab


      December 18, 2013 at 18:40 Reply
  13. Paul Loveridge

    I like this idea. Presumably after you deploy a Peasant you then set what kind of asteroid to siphon from?

    A couple of thoughts :
    1. Have a basic Peasant (serf?) that you can deploy for mining tutorials that drags in a minuscule amount but is almost useless on an industrial scale.
    2. Have better units that can only be deployed from mining barges for the real work, and take the ability to deploy mining beams and drones away from the barges. This gives the barges something to do.
    3. Change the mining beams and drones to things that are fitted to the peasant units only.

    But how do you handle 20 people trying to deploy Peasant units in a belt? Will each belt need a limit for each asteroid type?

    December 18, 2013 at 12:45 Reply
  14. CMIV

    “Why do they have mining bots for example? Because mining sucks”
    LMAO. You haven’t got a fucking clue. 100% of the mining bots I see aren’t because mining sucks. it’s because free ISK & RMT. Please educate yourself before making any more posts.

    “semi passive income source.”
    Take your passive income sources and stuff ’em where the sun don’t shine. Passive income is what ruins EvE. We need fewer passive income sources, not more.Give people a reason to undock and fight ffs.

    “At the same time it also provides targets for pvpers”
    I’m a PvPer. I do not want to shoot stationary structures. It’s fucking boring.

    “If the system is empty of enemies, a miner can do his job faster and go on to do β€œfun things” in Eve.”
    Or in the case of bots, they’ll just dock up and then you haven’t got a chance of catching them.

    “So by providing a viable and attractive alternative”
    It isn’t.

    “we can dwindle the number of bots in Eve”
    Ummm as far as I can tell, you’ve just created a few hundred thousand more bots.

    “introducing new ways for players to interact with one another.”
    By getting them to deploy the “peasant” and then dock up and go afk? Seriously, what planet are you on? Neptune?

    April fools day is in April, not December. I mean, this post isn’t serious. Is it?

    December 18, 2013 at 13:07 Reply
    1. Guess

      Actualy this is something similar to the idea I had a while ago, same thing, deployable mining depot, uses mining drones only, and has half the yield of the lowest T1 barge with min required skills to use said barge etc, also have it so that ANYONE can access the ore hold, only way to stop people stealing your ores are to blow them up.
      Basicly passive should ALWAYS bring in a lot lower amount/income than active.

      December 18, 2013 at 14:05 Reply
      1. CMIV

        Sounds more sensible than the OP for sure. Though I would rather that all forms of passive income are essentially removed or made so insignificant so that it would pay for a frigate a month.

        December 18, 2013 at 15:08 Reply
        1. U jelly bro? Passive income is a shitload of work. There’s nothing passive about hauling truckloads of goo + fuel / PI through pirate-infested space or hellbubbles.
          If you want to eliminate moongoo and PI profitability, it’s really simple. Just get everyone to stop using capital ships, starbases, and tech 2 anything.

          December 19, 2013 at 04:09 Reply
    2. Liu Bin

      No, I believe it is mocking the cure-all, silver bullet solution proposals that cause all the commentors on this site to head-desk so hard about another author’s articles.

      December 18, 2013 at 14:06 Reply
    3. Moo

      Miners have chosen to mine. Why do you insist on making everyone fight? This is a sandbox game. People don’t HAVE to fight, you know. You just want to be able to pick on people more, don’t you. Anyone comes up with an idea that doesn’t mean you get more sheep to slaughter and you get all overly and unnecessarily aggressive about it.

      Pathetic. Short sighted. Both of these you are.

      December 18, 2013 at 14:34 Reply
      1. CMIV

        I think you just won retard of the year award. EvE is an MMO. The 2nd M stands for Multi-player in case you didn’t know. i.e. EvE is a game where you interact with other players. This can take many forms. Trouble is you’re trying to make EvE into a one click per hour mindless “game”.

        Why do you insist on trying to turn EvE into a single player game that doesn’t need any other player apart from yourself? Why not, you know, go and play a fucking single player game. Fuck me you are an enormous idiot.

        December 18, 2013 at 15:03 Reply
        1. Ciaphas Cyne

          i never understood why these folks dont just play on sisi. afraid of risk? sisi lets u do anything with little to no interruption. considering you dont want to interact with real people anyway, it shouldnt matter if that ISK u make is “real” or not.

          December 18, 2013 at 21:16 Reply
    4. Seraph IX Basarab

      1. Because mining is the only way to RMT?

      2. Well it isn’t that passive because you need to guard it as it happens.

      3. You can’t dock up the “peasants.” They’re on a timer. Please read more carefully.

      4. These aren’t ACTUAL bots, please read more carefully.

      5. Maybe you can come to Neptune too, hopefully riding the reading rainbow. You can’t just deploy the peasant and go afk because it’s expensive, and can be destroyed. It has no reinforce timer.

      December 18, 2013 at 18:44 Reply
      1. CMIV

        1. Stop talking shit. No-one has said this was the case. But even if it was, your original statement is still stupendously bad and wrong. Your attempt at deflecting away from your lack of knowledge has failed.

        2. It’s *more* passive than it is now. This is bad. People flying ships and interacting = good. People docking up & doing nothing = bad and no game.

        3. Please read more carefully. The player docks up, not your new deployable bot. Hence a major reduction in player interaction. Comprehension. Learn it.

        4. They’re pretty darn close. Go argue the toss like a boss…

        5. As you’re on Neptune, I think I’ll swing by Mercury. Guaranteed a much warmer reception. At least everyone won’t be afk…

        December 19, 2013 at 07:25 Reply
        1. Seraph IX Basarab

          Man you are one angry little guy to talk to someone like that. Anyway I’ll help you understand.

          1. You said 100 percent of mining bots you see is because of RMT. You have some way to verify this or is the number pulled out of no where?

          2. You aren’t getting the part where you need to be undocked to guard the peasant…are you?

          3. He’s going to have to undock unless he enjoys burning his isk for no reason.

          4. Not closer than your eyes seem to be. 😑

          5. If people enjoy dropping buckets of isk out for me, sure why not.

          December 20, 2013 at 08:52 Reply
    5. There is no passive income in this game. Moons require fighting to get, fighting to keep, and hauling like you would not believe. PI has hauling and reconfiguration on a regular basis, and if it’s sov PI then you have to fight for the system the planets are in.

      Passive income is a myth.

      December 19, 2013 at 03:59 Reply
  15. Liu Bin

    Guys. Chill. This isn’t a Goblin article, it’s a satirical piece. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

    December 18, 2013 at 14:03 Reply
  16. Someotherdude

    I was very disappointed. I was hoping for a Cherry 3000 pleasure bot for my in-game toons to entertain themselves and brag about in the in-game bars and other seedy social establishments in New Eden. Alas, it’s about the bloody rocks and boring miners again….

    December 18, 2013 at 14:19 Reply
  17. Chris

    heh, all of you people are scrubs if you think this was a serious piece. It was obviously satire.

    At least I hope. I may not like most of your opinions Seraph but I don’t think you’re this stupid.

    December 18, 2013 at 14:24 Reply
  18. sour

    oookey, so why exactly some1 wont do that peasant concept u say AND bot at the same time?? the more income the merrier. gtfo πŸ˜›

    December 18, 2013 at 14:37 Reply
    1. Seraph IX Basarab

      CCP carries a stick for botting. I’m offering a viable carrot.

      December 18, 2013 at 18:45 Reply
  19. The Obvious

    I mine for hours upon hours with a dozen accounts. How do I do it? By firing up minecraft on an open monitor. Mining is something you do in the background while you’re watching tv or touching yourself. Don’t try while touching others, people get mad the fifth or sixth time you stop to haul ores.

    December 18, 2013 at 14:49 Reply
  20. asd

    Indeed a modest proposal !
    Bots vanquish bots and RMT conquers RMT. It’s got to be christmas time ! (^’.’^).

    December 18, 2013 at 15:05 Reply
  21. Cynical Man - The hero we need

    So planetary interaction?

    December 18, 2013 at 15:08 Reply
  22. LOL.


    December 18, 2013 at 15:24 Reply
  23. Gandalf

    Its funny that you compare mining to work. When I come back home after a hard day at the office, I like to log in Eve and mine for an hour or two and listen to music that makes my brain go numb. I guess we dont all have the same definition of work.

    December 18, 2013 at 15:24 Reply
    1. Malic

      There is mind numbing work in the real world friend. Data entry was one of the most soul crushing, brain dead jobs I have ever had, and well it didn’t take effort to do that job, it was work.

      December 18, 2013 at 18:37 Reply
  24. I love pandas

    Totally a satire, referencing to “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan smith where he criticized the English government for oppressing the Irish by providing the idea that the Irish should begin eating children as it would fix the problem effectively. Very clever and funny but the dumber parts of eve probably see this as a serious idea, these mining bots will never happen ( unless ccp wants to inflate the economy of their own game)

    December 18, 2013 at 15:28 Reply
    1. Dumber parts of eve

      Call me ignorant, but I always thought Jonathan Swift wrote “A Modest Proposal”.

      December 18, 2013 at 16:41 Reply
      1. I love pandas

        Autocorrect on my ihpone changed it to Smith, you would be correct.. ass

        December 18, 2013 at 20:00 Reply
        1. What’s an ihpone?
          JUST KIDDING!

          December 19, 2013 at 03:54 Reply
  25. CPP DEV

    >>>> Moved Features and Ideas

    December 18, 2013 at 15:51 Reply
  26. Hawk eey

    Don’t we already have this covered in PI and moon mining?

    December 18, 2013 at 15:55 Reply
    1. Seraph IX Basarab

      You ever shoot at anything involving PI and moon mining that didn’t have a timer?

      December 18, 2013 at 18:46 Reply
      1. It’s not hard to camp a popular customs office and suicide the tech 1 haulers that come by.

        December 19, 2013 at 03:53 Reply
        1. Andrew Metzger

          Hope you brought two faction scrams and ECCM.

          December 19, 2013 at 04:55 Reply
      2. Hawk eey

        1. Unstronted POSes
        2. Offline POSes
        3. Jump frieghters that jump in to supply said POSes

        In my opinion, the whole point of asteroid mining is to allow newbies to do something productive that is too tedious for more advanced players to do. Sure some people really like it and just keep mining throughout their entire Eve Online career, but other people move on. I’m pretty convinced that it’s not an efficient use of game time or real time for that matter though. I’m pretty happy how gankable miners are at the moment.

        December 20, 2013 at 17:40 Reply
  27. Bawk Bawkbagawk

    too preachy, didnt read. leave your fucking religion out of my Eve.

    December 18, 2013 at 16:15 Reply
  28. anon

    there was once a game for playstation1 named carnage heart. it was a game where you build mechs and then “programm” their cpu. after that you throw them in a combat area where they have to act on their own. find enemy, get in optimal range, use weapon a at range, use weapon b in melee stop firing weapon when overheated, take care of objects you could run against. and so on.
    (you can google for it if youwant to know more)

    something like that could fit to eve as well.

    December 18, 2013 at 16:28 Reply
  29. Ban

    There allready is a viable and attractive alternative which allows almost passive income. Its called planetary interaction. The issue with botting is that it is passive income which is many many many times higher than the other forms of income, because its taking an income that is comparably active and making it entirely passive. No effort, lots of isk. So lets think about it, a passive income that is comparable to botting? But all other forms of income would be obsolete! There would be no point in doing anything else and space would just die. CCP might aswell make isk passive gain like skillpoints. What a fantastic idea.

    December 18, 2013 at 16:51 Reply
    1. Seraph IX Basarab

      My perspective has always been pvp so this isn’t meant to “help miners” as much as it is to get something out there in the belts for me to shoot.

      December 18, 2013 at 18:47 Reply
      1. CMIV

        “get something out there in the belts for me to shoot”
        Like, say, mining ships which can actually shoot back and in the case of the skiff, tank like a boss? Actual ships flown by actual people, as opposed to static structures that don’t shoot back. Your idea really is incredibly backward if you want to focus on PvP.

        December 19, 2013 at 07:30 Reply
        1. Seraph IX Basarab

          People are going to want to guard their peasants considering they are on a timer. Miners don’t stay in space when neuts are in local.

          December 20, 2013 at 08:42 Reply
  30. eh

    they bot, because its constant streaming of ISK, thats it, nothing more. I am not sure why you think its because its boring or something

    December 18, 2013 at 17:14 Reply
  31. Muul Udonii

    I actually like this idea. It obviously needs a lot of work, but the principal of ‘deploy structure’ wait a while, scoop structure and empty are fine. It’s only like turning on your mining lasers, waiting a while and dropping into an orca or rorqual.

    December 18, 2013 at 17:25 Reply
  32. Gordon Gekko

    Grind is Good.

    Its what makes EvE EvE. The knowledge that if you die you are actually loosing something. The entire economic, sociologic, and psychologic functions of the game that make it great all stem from the fact that a lot of it IS WORK and provides PvPers with a rush few other games can. Dying actually matters, there are consequences, and by getting rid of the grind u nerf the consequences.

    Grind is Good

    December 18, 2013 at 17:48 Reply
    1. Playos

      grind is good, and this doesn’t have to get rid of grind… but if I could make similar income (marginally less even) while actually being in ships that could shoot back effectively in null it would be epically more fun for everyone involved.

      December 18, 2013 at 18:29 Reply
  33. Playos

    This isn’t botting… it’s just what mining should be.

    Set out deployables, get in a combat ship, WAIT FOR FIGHTS!!!

    It would be epic outside of HS.

    December 18, 2013 at 18:27 Reply
    1. Ciaphas Cyne

      exactly! its the small time equivalent of just being a miner with friends.

      December 18, 2013 at 21:12 Reply
  34. Deltaguy

    I have no problem mining as it is in nullsec right now. What i do have a problem with is the current price of minerals and how its the lowest profession in eve. Coupled with the constant nerfs to nullsec mining like changing the anoms to no longer need to be scanned and making ceptors bubble immune.

    December 18, 2013 at 19:10 Reply
  35. Newticle

    I like it, but it won’t happen. CCP is dead-set against passive income for everyone but moon & territory owners, which is why we now have this ridiculous situation of “space renters.”

    December 18, 2013 at 19:25 Reply
  36. needs work

    i like the idea but im a pvper. the people that mine, like to mine. why ruin there fun/ income.?

    December 18, 2013 at 19:32 Reply
  37. Charles Taylor

    your idea sounds good. Like legalize drugs instead of war on drugs.

    my understanding is, that the biggest botters are also guests on Evefest or CCP tournament. That is, why it still exists. CCP tolerates RMT to some degree.

    Another reason, why your idea will not come true:

    Eve players need to be stupid grinders. Many of the goals Eve players hve, are stupid numbers. Most blabla somethng. Nothing really exciting.

    If that does not exist anymore, players would wake up and ask themselves, what am I doing here? Why am I wasting my time with this crap?

    Both these things are principles of power, how to manipulate a dumb mass.

    December 18, 2013 at 20:01 Reply
  38. bob

    I like it, as long as anyone can come and take the cargo, and concord forbids them in High-sec. Anything that gives people a reason to be at a belt in low or null sec is a good idea. Adding this many minerals into the economy would probably help lower ship costs, BC’s cost 2x what they did when I started eve. It would also give players a reason to produce more stuff in Null, which is greatly needed. There needs to be some sort of limiting factor, 1 per belt, and it’s mining capabilities should pale in comparison to a mining ship, you must be online in the system (as to not be totally afk), perhaps some kind of ship class restrictions as to who can access them.

    With the right implementation, a great idea.

    December 18, 2013 at 20:54 Reply
  39. Dirty Rotten Sneaky Bastard

    I think I understand now.Bob and Riverinni keep Goblin around to make you look better.
    BTW good idea. I know those out there that will argue that this keeps miners from doing their thing. Not true, they can still mine, just with vastly increased output. Which , in the long run, will bring ship prices down.

    December 18, 2013 at 21:16 Reply
  40. Provi Miner

    Hmmm I recall (and can’t find the link sorry) but do to the inaccuracy’s of early calanders some university decided it was most likely november. BTW The whole point of christmas, easter, saints day, and so forth were to keep converts happy.

    December 18, 2013 at 22:40 Reply
  41. oinker

    umm… read rubicon notes, re: siphon units

    December 19, 2013 at 03:43 Reply
  42. Jacob Young

    Tis’ the season to be Trolling…

    December 19, 2013 at 13:36 Reply
  43. Sounds OP

    And what would be the yield per hour? How would it fair against a procurer with T1 mining upgrades/strip miner I? How about a T2 fit venture? Would it only mine ore or gas as well. Would there be a limit per belt or per player? Just imagine a 15 belt system with one character placing 3 of these per belt and only getting 100 m3 per minute per structure. That’s 4500m3 per minute or a hauler full every 10. Way OP.

    December 19, 2013 at 15:58 Reply
  44. Sold

    +1 for knowledgeable xmas debunk. -1 for bad idea. But what about different size mining drones?

    December 19, 2013 at 19:36 Reply
    1. Chris

      Bro its satire. He’s not actually proposing that idea.

      December 20, 2013 at 17:49 Reply
  45. Captain Obvious

    It’s alright, just alpha the shit out of it. Boom, easy.

    December 20, 2013 at 01:57 Reply
  46. Fartolio

    ….de puiimei, hahahahahaha. Eu oricum numeam minerii “tzarani” asa ca mare treaba nu ar fi. Dar mi-ar place sa vad asta.

    December 20, 2013 at 02:56 Reply
  47. James Taylor

    Is PI not a form of this – something that you can land / look at once every couple of days and just generally leave ticking over? Why mess with the eve-mining? Have you not realised yet that some of us actually enjoy it, and would rather that the rest of you don’t, buy from us at fair prices rather then resorting to botting?

    December 20, 2013 at 16:37 Reply
  48. Das Kriegen

    I mine because I want the minerals to get into the other aspects of EVE production. I mine in high sec because I can do that with 5 accounts and watch shit and/or study. I would love to mine in low sec/null sec but it generally isn’t worth the risk as there is always someone hanging around the most accessible systems.
    I would actually like something like this, just make it only work when you are in system, and in space (so you could run combat sites or something if you were bored) and only below 0.5. Cost maybe something like T1 barge, maybe 50 mil or so? Maybe (if it is modular etc) fit up to 1 T2 strip like a procurer but only have the EHP of a covetor so it’s weak. If NPCs are able to attack them that means you can’t just leave them and sit in a POS either. Give them a pretty good ore hold (maybe 50k? Perhaps as much as a Miasmos with lvl 5 could fit?). Have a skill like drones so you can have say up to 5 active max.
    Even if players just used them as an addition to their mining fleets in low/null it would be a good reason to actually get out and mine those low/null belts and improve the risk/reward of mining in the lower sec space. Further, if they didnt get fleet boosts and couldnt fit crystals then at peak performance it could not outdo a procurer.

    December 21, 2013 at 08:35 Reply
  49. Guest

    Seraph IX Basarab, it is a nice idea, but you are a nullsec person, and it is common to forget that highsec still has a great majority of the playerbase of EvE Online. I find it a great idea for nullsec or lowsec, but then you would have people deploying 20 of these deployable peasants without any real danger around. Noone would suicide to kill one peasant (he wouldn’t have time to kill more). Therefore, I would like to add to your idea and suggest that this kind of deployable equipment should be deployable only in <0,5 security πŸ˜€ Happy Holidays!!!

    December 23, 2013 at 18:35 Reply
  50. rgpuegrxb tmokm ydbudyq masf xpmrknzttdiqvbi

    November 30, 2017 at 09:14 Reply

Leave a Reply