Mini games in Eve’s future?

As some of you will now have seen from Fanfest the idea of compact “mini games” is coming to our gaming
universe, at the moment it will be confined to exploration but I think this small “toe dip” into the murky waters of “mini gaming” is the tip of what could be some pretty big changes. It reminded me of a proposition I put forward some years ago on the eve-o forums that was also mini game based and I thought I would post it here for interest and maybe to spark debate. Shown below is the post in pretty much it’s original form……

The ancient post

Idea 1: Copying is the sincerest flattery…
Mass effect 2 style probing mini game using a audio/ visual queue as you hover over a asteroid representation to find the best areas of the asteroid to hit with your mining lasers. if you choose poorly (or not at all in the case of afk miners) you get a poorer yield (mining skills could improve the accuracy of the audio/ visual queue or the resolution you could scan at maybe). You could also have the rare “ultra dense” drops show as a special anomaly on this that you may miss if you do not check thoroughly) If you have not played mass effect 2 there are loads of vids on youtube of the probing mechanic but my forum foo is weak and I cant make a working linky. Sad face.
Idea 2: use a similar mechanic already in place….
How about the “heat map” from PI also becomes audio and is adapted to be used on asteroids to again show relative potential yield areas with the same “if you choose poorly (or not at all in the case of afk miners) you get a poorer yield mechanism I mentioned above. Obviously the visual heat map will need to be robust enough or the colour scale changeable to allow for visual impairment. Also as with PI you could simulate resource depletion so it rewards people interacting more and finding the best mining laser site at any given time. Skills can effect the audio/visual representation in a way similar to PI and through properly exploring the asteroids you may find the “super duper dense officer
mining equivalent” that an afk miner will not further rewarding people actually actively mining.
Possible fall out of proposed mining “improvements”
Okay those are 2 ideas that someone elsewhere may have already had but I didn’t spot (sorry if this is the case and its not intended as an offence) but what could be the result of making mining better through a “mini game mechanic”?
As is already known people like to min max where possible, by adding a new element to the equation to take concentration you run the risk of not spotting other things (like that hostile that just came into system or the new belt rats etc). I am not actually saying this is a bad thing (I am actually a null sec raider and would love more chance that a miner may not spot my entry into local but I feel this mini game idea, due to concentration required to attain the best results will actually help keep the “risk/reward” mechanic in place.
Also on the subject of min maxing fits I had a random idea, why are asteroids only a resource? why not make them the trigger for rat spawns or even have them shoot back? using the two potential mechanics listed above how about not having all finds positive?
While were at it why are asteroids “only” positive? You could have some asteroid anomalies that are negative, for example…
1. You accidentally spooked a hidden pirate hideout and they boil out of hiding to protect their hideaway (maybe handled as simply as a player generated belt spawn)
2. The asteroid actually has camouflaged weapon emplacements and starts shooting at you itself and you must now incapacitate the defenses or even leave its vicinity if you cannot.
3. There is a pocket of explosive minerals/ gas/ compounds, the asteroid goes off like a smart bomb.
Hell go wild people, I am sure others can come up with cool alternative asteroid anomalies both positive and negative.
The mechanic of system sec status could be used to govern the likely hood of these “negative and positive anomalies” and the severity when they occur and skills could help you spot these special anomalies more easily and avoid them or not as required. This will add an element of balance into people fitting there mining ships as they have to consider if they can survive a potential “negative anomaly” which again helps the risk/reward mechanic.

Some final thoughts

As I said this is a post I made some years ago, the thing that worries me though is that is one area that even with the re balance of the mining ships there has been no iteration off, a rarity in Eve these days, I actually spoke with CCP greyscale at Fanfest about the “why are all “anomalies” positive idea, can we have some negative ones and he sounded genuinely interested so who knows maybe in the near future we may be hearing about actually interesting “once when I was mining” stories that don’t involve a mass smart bomb gank, who knows?

6 thoughts on “Mini games in Eve’s future?

  1. Chanina says:

    First to say, I am not against mini games in particular. The new stuff lurking at us from Odyssey over there looks really good. And the ability to do this stuff together will be good.

    But Mining is for a long time a game for multi account users. Some are doing it ridiculously heavy with over 10 accounts mining supported with software like ISBoxer.
    If that is reduced to a more “moderate” amount I’m fine with it. But a Mini game in mining that needs 100% attention on one character would eliminate the benefit of multiple mining accounts and kill the “relaxed” engagement with the game it provides.

    If CCP wants a resource gathering mechanic with mini game they should think about different methods to achieve the same. Luckily CCP stated that somewhere that they don’t wish to eliminate this kind of activity but introduce new ones in addition.

    In short: Just because one mechanic is nice in one area doesn’t mean it fits everywhere. Different styles to play this game you know?

    • Rob Wiebkin says:

      I Couldnt agree more with this one. Any form of engagement with mining needs to be on an “opt in” basis. I think CCP could do more to reduce the ease of botting the activity, but not to the extent of requiring constant engagement with the game.

      I think this can still be done with the description Arian has given above. For example with the Negative and Positive Roids, you could set it so that the events only have to be done once per roid, allowing you to check for concentrated deposits, ensure that its not hostile, and then mine away to your hearts content.

    • Arian Blade says:

      Hi, As Rob said I do not foresee this idea as doing away with semi or afk mining, I may not have made it clear but I think I said “if you choose poorly (or not at all in the case of afk miners) you get a poorer yield” so i do not wish to end multiaccount mining or afk/ semi afk mining, I merely want to give the opportunity to make it more engaging for new miners and have it reward that engagement.

      I would ask however if it is right that an entire career path is balanced for specialist multi account users a long way into there career who are (possibly) a minority over potential new bro’s and normal single account users and corps in the first place? This after all is supposed to be an MMO. This is an honest question and I am not calling IS boxers a scourge (there are dirties members who do precisely what were talking about here, I just find it interesting and would love to gauge opinion.

      • Chanina says:

        “I think I said “if you choose poorly (or not at all in the case of afk miners) you get a poorer yield””

        Yes I know you said so. And it shows that you thought about it. But it will be a very tricky part to hit the right balance between active and not so active mining yield.

        “I would ask however if it is right that an entire career path is balanced for specialist multi account users”
        This one is a real challenge. I’m a multi account user so I might be biased here. If there was a way to mine active and get a higher yield than mining semi-afk with say 3 accounts some might cancel there subscriptions for those accs. Would it be possible to active mine with 2 Characters and improve that by using the third as hauler? That highly depends on the “how active is active” part.
        On the other hand, I recently had some contact with young players starting eve and they are very interested in mining. With a Venture in there hand they made them self a good income. They play one account and don’ want to increase that. I wouldn’t like to loose them from the mining profession just because it isn’t doable with only one account.
        A mechanic (or active interaction) to increase the mining yield of a single miner would help them to increase that income. But how much should the single active miner be able to increase his yield? Should it double it or add 50%, maybe even less with just 15% more yield.

        Like rob said, a once per roid action might be a good way to go, depending on how good you hit it the time to deplete the roid goes down. But current roids (in high sec) deplete too fast anyway.

        In the end I think mining shouldn’t center around multi account users but it shouldn’t negate the effect of having them either. It is hard to balance and it will bring out tears no matter where the final line is placed. But I really would like a resource gathering activity that rewards a bunch of people playing together collecting it faster than they would be able to all for them self.

        PS: sorry for that delay, took some time to see “oh it only shows g+ comments right now” … :-/

        • Harkconnan says:

          Sorry about the comments issue, looks like we changed sites mid conversation. Thanks for sticking it out though! I’ve changed the original comments to display first :).

          I think the crux of the issue is exactly as you say: the balance. Goodness knows they couldn’t pay me enough if I (or anyone else) knew how to do that perfect every time.

  2. This !

    Oh, and the one mentioning similar mechanics was Dierdra Vaal IIRC when he was CSM. Maybe you find supporting documentation in the CSM realm of EVElopedia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *