Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

I'll go ahead and get all this out of the way, beware of page long post. tongue

Max Tesla wrote:

What is with this pvp is the best and everything else is worse mentality

Different people find different things fun

Some people find it fun to pvp, some find it fun to do missions some find it fun to mine etc etc

By saying that to achieve maximum amount of fun in mining you MUST go to the pvp area is saying that mining fun is less valued than pvp fun and you are building a pyramid hierarchy of fun where pvp is considered the most fun

Let those who want pvp, pvp and let those who want to mine, mine and let those who want to run missions do so

Stop thinking that everyone everywhere wants to pvp and all other types of fun is less valued

In my opinion that is the biggest problem with stEVE this whole risk vs mentality when in fact it is the miner and mission runners who must risk everything so that the minority of pvpers can have fun by risking nothing and gaining their fun, the quote earlier about marathon runners and weight lifters is good

If people want to shoot each other fine, but do not force people who don't into that area

If people find it fun drilling into rocks  than god bless and let them if that gives them joy

If people find it fun to pvp than god bless them, but do not force people who don't want to do that into pvp

Stop meddling with people

The more posts by you I see, the less intelligent you seem to me. At no point did I ever state that one type of play would/could/is/or should be more fun than another, my post was made to be unbiased as humanly possible, did not shove my opinion down anyone's throat, nor was it directed at a player in particular.

It was simply my "opinion" and unlike you, I have no intention of bashing your "opinion" like it was a personally attack on me. (Although your post actually is, ironically.)

I'll make a habit of simply ignoring your posts from now on, as they contain more childish ranting and bashing of other people's ideas and posts, than actual thoughts and suggestions on whatever topic is at hand.

Faxeir wrote:

You're not. You're a PvPer. Not every player is/will be PvPer whether you like it or not.

Seeding risky parts of the game with rare stuff will give the elite players a shortcut to wealth and domination as well be a huge magnet for the goldseller to exploit.

As to the recycling part. The economy isn't stable atm so its impossible to make any substantial claim about it. I still needs to pan out.

Seeing as I account for some 70% of all sales currently on the market, and have twice as much NIC as any 2 corporations combined and have nearly every single item in the game researched, prototyped, and in bulk. And have done so since the beginning of the game. (Feel free to have a DEV/GM verify this.) I would think I very much qualify as a industrialist in this game as much as a pirate/pvper.

Might want to check what you say in the future, so you don't look like an idiot.

Maynard wrote:

According to Pareto Principle, only 20% of the players will be the winners, you need a content for those 80%. At the end, they are no less subscribers as the winners are.

Your right, not everyone will move out to pvp islands, some don't enjoy it. I don't believe anyone is arguing this, but moving some stuff to pvp has to happen, otherwise the loss of the bots in pvp will be pointless (Bar the thrill of pvp itself) unless there is a suitable reward for doing so.

Feel free to offer alternative solutions if you dislike this one. And keep in mind, much like Steve, this game's economy is going to be 90% based on pvp, it's the only way I know of that it can work.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Blackomen wrote:

I'll go ahead and get all this out of the way, beware of page long post. tongue


The more posts by you I see, the less intelligent you seem to me. At no point did I ever state that one type of play would/could/is/or should be more fun than another, my post was made to be unbiased as humanly possible, did not shove my opinion down anyone's throat, nor was it directed at a player in particular.


And the more I read of your posts the less intelligent you seem to me

And as a small child you avoid talking about the question and hand and start ranting about something else

It is about FUN

Do you understand FUN?

Some people find it fun to pvp

Some find it fun to mine

Some find it fun to do missions

By having rare minerals ONLY on pvp areas you are forcing everyone to pvp even those who do not want to pvp

So for a miner to have HIS maximum amount of fun his must either pay a % of his profits to a pvper or become one himself

Whilst a pvper to have his maximum amount of fun which is pvping does not need to pay anyone anything and can collect money just as the mafia "for protection" of the mission runners and miners

But of course do not let my sound and logical reasoning hinder you in your childish rantings which do not address the current topic at hand that some fun is valued greater than other types of fun

And since you are such a small child I also will make it a point of not reading your childish  rantings any more

Last edited by Max Tesla (2010-08-10 14:09:33)

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Darin Raltin wrote:

My eyes! My eyes!

I feel like I'm watching a slap fight with people going "no you!"

The real profits from mining don't come from minerals, its from producing.  Its the lowest in the food chain as far as production goes - mining, refining, producing.  Regardless of what the devs do or don't do, mining will be one of the weakest professions simply because market forces will dictate that (no one will sell a bot for less than the minerals and the CT costs, unless they fail at math).

The sooner everyone realizes that, the better.  All the devs can do is adjust mineral faucet and sink rates to aim for a price they feel is reasonable.  Scarcity drives competition - and even if you don't engage in "PvP" - you still are.

*The miner in the alpha island is PvP'ing the other miner on the alpha island by depleting the node
*The producer is PvP'ing other producers on the market by competing on price for buy and sell orders
*The trader is PvP'ing everybody else by locating trade routes, and in many cases socially engineering their own bubbles and crashes
*NPC farmers are competng with each other for who can use the spawn - a castel shooting a spawn simply can't keep up with a tyrannos shooting the same spawn.

Its all semantics, sandboxes are all about competition.  Encouraging competition - both combat and non-combat - should be of the highest priority in a sandbox.

As to the secondary topic at hand, you *need* hard assets to fight over.  If every country in the Real World had access to local oil, coal, food, water, etc etc geopolitics would be substantially less ***.  In the context of a game world, if you give everybody everything it sterilizes the game.

*Without something meaningful to fight over, pvp'ers get bored
*Without pvp'ers fighting each other, producers can't sell anything as item death is ultimately required
*Without producers selling things, no one will be buying the minerals that miners mine

So seriously - the incessant fighting completely misses the point and is drowning out useful discussion on the subject.

/waits for someone to miss the point


You as so many other are missing the point that it is about FUN

Some find it FUN to mine some find it FUN to do missions and some find it FUN to pvp

What you are saying is that pvp FUN should be valued greater than all other types of FUN

Because a miner or mission runner must eiter pay a % of his profits by joining a corp/guild which founds pvping to be able to have his FUN

But a pvper can have his FUN for free with the money which the miners / mission runners are running

And also there will be demand even when the best minerals are in safe areas

People will still pvp, people will join the game, which requires new stuff for them, people will advance their extensions/skills which will give them access to better stuff, and people will still fight npcs and will lose their eq to npcs

It is like you have never heard of games where there is no pvp but where there still is demand for stuff

By you logic no one would ever buy more than 1 car because people aren't blowing their cars up in a significant number

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Blackomen wrote:

Your right, not everyone will move out to pvp islands, some don't enjoy it. I don't believe anyone is arguing this, but moving some stuff to pvp has to happen, otherwise the loss of the bots in pvp will be pointless (Bar the thrill of pvp itself) unless there is a suitable reward for doing so.

Feel free to offer alternative solutions if you dislike this one. And keep in mind, much like Steve, this game's economy is going to be 90% based on pvp, it's the only way I know of that it can work.

The beauty of the market is that it is self-regulatory thus concerns about not enough loses is something you do not have to be worried about.

In that matter, NIC sinks and faucets are more important to deal with first.


As pointed out a few posts above, proposed changes do exact opposite as they are supposed to achieve. Then, I would need to understand what you are trying to 'solve' here first.

This is a discussion about game design, not a simple game change or feature. For that, I do lack knowing of what is coming in the future and most importantly, how the devs want the game to be.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Blackomen wrote:

Seeing as I account for some 70% of all sales currently on the market, and have twice as much NIC as any 2 corporations combined and have nearly every single item in the game researched, prototyped, and in bulk. And have done so since the beginning of the game. (Feel free to have a DEV/GM verify this.) I would think I very much qualify as a industrialist in this game as much as a pirate/pvper.

Nice hurf but not quite convincing. You think you can compare a market of 500 people to one that has 5000, 50000 or more people? Do you have any experience with a 50000+ user market?

In addition you just gave the perfect example of having elitists because of they were the first ones to get to the 'good stuff'. There should be at all times more than one way to acquire a resource to avoid monopolies/cartels.

Might want to check what you say in the future, so you don't look like an idiot.

I'm not the one that has spend way too much time in a frigging beta. Might want to pace yourself to avoid being burned up for the real thang.

Seeing this reply from you are just another one trying to influence the game in your favor at cost of others. What is it with you lot? Ready to do anything to stay on top?

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

The beauty of the market is that it is self-regulatory thus concerns about not enough loses is something you do not have to be worried about.

So tell me about lotro? E&B? STG? PSO? any other number of mmo games that failed shortly after launch, and had markets in them?

If people enjoyed playing those so much, surely the markets would have regulated the game to make sure nothing like, say, everyone quitting; would have any affect on them at all right? wink

<Kwitch> I tried to RE Epriton. The game lol'd @ me.
<Siddy> i hope your brains go enouhght processing poweres to realise the problem
<Socrates> ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα / "The only real wisdom is knowing you know nothing"

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Maynard Benaui wrote:
Blackomen wrote:

Your right, not everyone will move out to pvp islands, some don't enjoy it. I don't believe anyone is arguing this, but moving some stuff to pvp has to happen, otherwise the loss of the bots in pvp will be pointless (Bar the thrill of pvp itself) unless there is a suitable reward for doing so.

Feel free to offer alternative solutions if you dislike this one. And keep in mind, much like Steve, this game's economy is going to be 90% based on pvp, it's the only way I know of that it can work.

The beauty of the market is that it is self-regulatory thus concerns about not enough loses is something you do not have to be worried about.

In that matter, NIC sinks and faucets are more important to deal with first.


As pointed out a few posts above, proposed changes do exact opposite as they are supposed to achieve. Then, I would need to understand what you are trying to 'solve' here first.

This is a discussion about game design, not a simple game change or feature. For that, I do lack knowing of what is coming in the future and most importantly, how the devs want the game to be.

Elaborate your statements further because of lacking differentiation makes it hard to understand.

@Faxeir- same.

Last edited by LatscherX (2010-08-10 17:15:35)

108

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

*edit* Removed personal rants this post is referring to. - DEV Zoom

Yet Blackomen is saying you can accept his theory or not, and that he's not defining anything by it, and that there is many different play styles that could be fun to many different people, and you just go around calling people children and have some skewed view of "maximum fun" or something.


Even with rare materials only in pvp areas, or higher yields in less populated (therefore less mined dry, how I would explain it being that way), theres ample "fun opportunity" to still be had in complete safety if thats what you want.

All you propose is that people should be able to play this game as purely PvE if they want to, and thats not how this game works.  This isnt "grind your best gear up in PvE without any distraction then go into PvP with said gear when you feel like it".  If you want something like that I suggest you play another game.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Neoxx wrote:

Yet Blackomen is saying you can accept his theory or not, and that he's not defining anything by it, and that there is many different play styles that could be fun to many different people, and you just go around calling people children and have some skewed view of "maximum fun" or something.


Even with rare materials only in pvp areas, or higher yields in less populated (therefore less mined dry, how I would explain it being that way), theres ample "fun opportunity" to still be had in complete safety if thats what you want.

All you propose is that people should be able to play this game as purely PvE if they want to, and thats not how this game works.  This isnt "grind your best gear up in PvE without any distraction then go into PvP with said gear when you feel like it".  If you want something like that I suggest you play another game.



The most important thing here is that A he called me a low intelligent child FIRST, he started with the name calling and now rants on when I respond in kind, that is the most important thing here

B if people want to pve let them if they have money which to pay to play and want that let them

And yes their is a fun grading where people who want to pvp can do that and achive their maximum amount of fun doing that and nothing else all they need to do is pvp

But people who want to mine and/or do missions MUST also pvp or pay off pvpers to be able to achieve their maximum amount of fun which is doing something pve

The ONLY reason people want to have high end minerals in low sec areas, is so that they can have risk free targets to attack and bother people who just want to mine or do missions and be left alone

All the risk is taken by the person mining and all of the fun is had by the pvper

The pvper fun is higher ranked since he can do exactly what he wants which is pvping and other must adapt to him

110

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

OMG PIRATES GONNA KEEL MEH!

No.  Again.  What you dont realize is that these so-called super scary pirates who want to ruin the game as we know it also do a lot of mining and industrial things to support such a nasty habbit.  Its very possible (if not a certainty) that they know more about the mining and industry systems than you do.

So, these people would experience the same system that you would on the mining side.  The FUN of that being trying to avoid dying and mining as much as you can as quickly as you can.  The miners satisfaction comes from mining and not dying, the excitement being getting those valuable resources to a safe location ot sell or build with.

Why do you think that that extra risk wouldnt be more fun for a miner?

The RISK to the pvper is wasting time finding targets and not getting much profit from it (or literally 0 with the current system).  The reward is super low other than knowing you make other people hate their lives, as you obviously do.

What the *** is it with you and "run heirarchies" and "fun rankings" like you can somehow quantify a good time.  Please, let me in on your extremely scientific equations that determine the amount of endorphines released in a players brain when partaking in certain activities contrasted with their already built up resistance to said "pleasure juice" because of how much fun they've already had in a short amount of time.

Please.  Explain.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

okay if you're going to force the pacifist to go into dangerous areas to do what he wants to you've just eliminated a potential customer. And don't worry I have a flame retardant outfit

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

thread. on-topic.

How about a zone that hasn't been mined in X time gives a Y bonus output, for a short duration. The geoscanner could call it a 'rich vein' etc.

This way, an un-used spot on Alpha could become valuable. Alpha island would self-balance with generally poor fields due to over-mining. Outpost zones would become much more popular for miners due to un-tapped fields.

And Beta islands, with their lower populations, would be excellent. Police-zone mining would be poor like the over-mined zones on alpha. Outside survey locations would be fantastic.

Then neither alpha or beta inhabitant could say 'They have it better than me' for any reason. it would be completely based on population. Beta would be superior because the mienrs on alpha made it so.

Yes?

<Kwitch> I tried to RE Epriton. The game lol'd @ me.
<Siddy> i hope your brains go enouhght processing poweres to realise the problem
<Socrates> ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα / "The only real wisdom is knowing you know nothing"

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

That may be a good compromise Kwitch, but I think that the original thought was all about dragging people towards PVP areas in order to achieve something faster or to very obviously proceed slowly and tediously, if you're not going to be involved in PvP. Putting a heavy emphasis on this being a PvP game. If you don't participate in Pvp then you're drawing the short straw, which I don't agree with. I strongly believe that there should be a fair PvE experience for people who choose to do just that.

I'm fine with Epriton only being available on beta and further, it gives the inhabitants an opportunity, miners a reason and those who seiz it might experience very fruitful trade opportunities. Though currently it's only for refining Alligior since you can recycle pretty much all espitium you need from loot. Not saying it's bad, just stating the obvious.

If I go mining Epriton on any of the beta islands I'm perfectly aware of the risks. In fact, if I'm mining alone, I certainly expect to die if someone shows up on the landmarks overview. Unless of course I expect to mine enough Epriton to pay a couple of guys that would put their asses on the line and blow anyone to pieces or try die trying.

But as I formerly stated, this was only really for scheduled operations, I would not expect anyone to be around for protection whenever I would like to mine. And to repeat myself, I'm fine with Epriton only being available on beta+ islands but I'm still against lowering the yield on alpha islands.

I still think that alpha islands should stay how they are and maybe give beta island "rich" deposits, maybe randomly spawned to make it a challgenge to find them.

Last edited by Ulviirala (2010-08-12 06:20:05)

I don't just embrace insanity. I feel it up, french kiss it and then buy it a drink.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

So I'm not sure if you liked my idea, but thought it was off-topic? Or didn't like my idea because it was not the current model in game? I saw your suggestion to make the Beta spawns randomized, and I don't know if I agree with it. I agree the risk factor is good and should stay how it is regarding epriton.

<Kwitch> I tried to RE Epriton. The game lol'd @ me.
<Siddy> i hope your brains go enouhght processing poweres to realise the problem
<Socrates> ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα / "The only real wisdom is knowing you know nothing"

115

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

For what i can get until now is that the only reason for this topic is to increase the population on Beta+ islands. To do so, some wants to nerf the mining output on Alpha+ islands "Forcing" some players to go there and have better output for their activites.

With that in mind people expect to improve the population and obviously the occurrence of PVP. I agree that the Beta+ islands need to have more things to catch the interest of players. Many can disagree but if you read the whole topic is that the basic idea. Moving miners to Beta+ so we have a major occurence of PVP.

But nerfing the output of mining on Alpha+ islands is simple a very little inteligent idea. The overall progresion will be dropped, less mats for starter, more time for then to get what they need to improve and move foward.

By being a miner i don't disagree with the PVP, on contrary it will only make my "life" more lucrative. what i disagree is that the only reason to go to Beta+ islands are to shoot miners(except the cases that in there are some protection) or simple mine.

I will gladly move to Beta+ if the mining process receive a boost, that way i will not need to spend hours doing a static activite. Simple "double" the speed of mining in that areas and you will have an exodus to Beta+.

>)

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Removed off-topic posts.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- Bill Cosby

117

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Ulviirala wrote:

but I think that the original thought was all about dragging people towards PVP areas in order to achieve something faster or to very obviously proceed slowly and tediously, if you're not going to be involved in PvP

In that regard, you are completely wrong.  I never said that I want to completely wtfpwnzorz anyone who wanted to mine on alpha, but make beta mining an acceptable risk vs reward over what you could already do on alpha.

I never said the % change was good, or that we should even discuss it at all.  This thread was only about the possibility of having higher mining rates on beta, because of the (lore warning) reasoning so much mining goes on in Alpha that theres less minerals there in general.

If you wanted to mine on alpha your whole career it would be very possible.  If you couldnt accept the higher risk on beta, and thought that the risk was too high for you, you dont have to go and you wont be so severely punished that it will be impossible to keep up.

You also have to look at the converse of this situation.  If someone goes mining on beta because they think "OMG SO MUCH MORE TO MINE! NOMNOMNOM!" and goes without protection and gets owned over and over again and continually has to buy new bots, the person that decided to stay on alpha will actually be making more profit.

Its all about risk vs reward, and balancing the various situations with the various levels of risk involved.  Alpha has nearly 0 risk, so thats the "control" that every other situation has to be balanced with.

Currently, theres no reason to mine any of the other available materials on beta than epriton and titan (in order to refine alligior on beta) because the risk vs reward is so much higher than on alpha.  You get the same yield, but you have the chance of getting killed very easily by roaming players.

Why do we even have those materials on beta, then?  People will say because alpha materials will get outmined and force people to beta, but I cant see that happening for a LOOOOOONG time, and I'm sure everyone agrees on that point.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

isnt the problem the distribution of ores in the items?

even the lowest items (ammo) nead nearly all possible ores. the recent change, that higher Tier items contain more epriton was a little step into the right direction.

IMHO this Idea should be developed further to be able to move another Ore (or plant) deposits to PvP islands only.

Once there was a plan to make Prisocitae harvestable for hightech alien stuff. This one could be used to replace a component in T4 equipment (eg. stermonite).
Because its used only in high tier equipment, it can't be collected by recycling lower tier items (like everyone does for espitium)

“The truth is balance. However the opposite of truth, which is unbalance, may not be a lie.”
(Susan Sontag)
Forum Moderator

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

GM Kami wrote:

isnt the problem the distribution of ores in the items?

The problem is even more abstract than just that. It's how the distribution of resources is implicating the gameplay in the entire realm.

The majority of the players is in favor of balancing this with a black or white solution. But that will give you just one shot to get it right. Balancing it aftwards will have a major impact no matter what.

If you use a 'grey' solution not only the players will know in advance that the balance may shift but it won't cause massive whinefests (only minor ones). Don't have a single mechanism for distribution of an resource type but have several in parallel which are linked in a way to keep it balanced the way it suits the majority of the players.

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

What about not using stachinol for slug ammo?  Make it plasteosine (to add variety) or phlobotil (to add consistency) and then you can free up Immentium to be moved off Alpha.

Liquizit would be another candidate, since Liquizit is only ever found as a polymer you could shift the Vitricyl around if you had too.

IMO Helioptris, Titan, HDT, and Stermonit are plenty of resources for Alpha and then you can dump immentium and liquizit on Beta.

Immentium is so heavy already, and so poorly priced, its not worth mining ATM as it is.

Last edited by Darin Raltin (2010-08-12 20:12:10)

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Darin Raltin wrote:

Immentium is so heavy already, and so poorly priced, its not worth mining ATM as it is.

I think the Devs said that the base prices for the minerals are sortof "made up" in cold math and they didn't or couldn't come up with something a player would deem as a "real" or "fair" price in the beginning.

That people don't want to pay 4x as much for Liquizit (because it's 4 times the volume) than for Titan ore (0.0001U) is just the people, or 3x as much for Imentium (0.0003U), because it's just 3x or 4x as much effort to mine the same quantity.

If miners blindly accept the price that people put up for Imentium, it's their problem. Although I admit that you have to do quite some science to do the math, because the mineral extraction rates are not quite obvious at first.

They should *ASK* for an appropriate price but they often go with "instacash" instead. Refine imentium to statichnol and ask any price you want, 2.5x or even 3.0x the NPC base buy price and you're good. Same goes for stuff with Liquizit in it.

Ulviirala wrote:

dragging people towards PVP areas in order to achieve something faster or to very obviously proceed slowly and tediously, if you're not going to be involved in PvP

Neoxx wrote:

This thread was only about the possibility of having higher mining rates on beta, because of the (lore warning) reasoning so much mining goes on in Alpha that theres less minerals there in general.

Neoxx wrote:

Alpha Islands:  Mining and harvesting yield is lowered to 50% its current rate.

Google wrote:

Did you mean: having lower mining rates on alpha?

I just had to do it :b

Neoxx wrote:

People will say because alpha materials will get outmined and force people to beta, but I cant see that happening for a LOOOOOONG time, and I'm sure everyone agrees on that point.

I have been mining some deposits for a while now and everytime I go do a tile-scan for my next op, I see no signs of regeneration/respawn yet and I've bitten some big chunks out of there by now, all on my own.

Also the nearby triandlus spawn takes days before there's something harvestable again, the huge fields of heloptris I harvested two weeks ago while my Termis was automagically transformed in a CT to bake new ones in the factory, have never really grown back as they were before.

If it stays at that rate, I dare say that I can see deposits depleting after a rather short timespan, but I don't know how regeneration works. Beta islands could have a faster respawn rate, like 1.25x times as fast?

Though I guess resource shortages will grow to be a problem.

Last edited by Ulviirala (2010-08-13 06:31:58)

I don't just embrace insanity. I feel it up, french kiss it and then buy it a drink.

122

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Seriously.... how much more out of context could you POSSIBLY quote me?

Neoxx wrote:

Alpha Islands:  Mining and harvesting yield is lowered to 50% its current rate.

Neoxx also f*cking wrote:

This is only an idea.  The values have not been tested or discussed for balance in any way, and are only for demonstration of this concept.   Please keep replies on the concept of lowering alpha island yields only, and not on how much.  Thank you.

So yeah.

Neoxx wrote:

People will say because alpha materials will get outmined and force people to beta, but I cant see that happening for a LOOOOOONG time, and I'm sure everyone agrees on that point.

I have been mining some deposits for a while now and everytime I go do a tile-scan for my next op, I see no signs of regeneration/respawn yet and I've bitten some big chunks out of there by now, all on my own.

Also the nearby triandlus spawn takes days before there's something harvestable again, the huge fields of heloptris I harvested two weeks ago while my Termis was automagically transformed in a CT to bake new ones in the factory, have never really grown back as they were before.

If it stays at that rate, I dare say that I can see deposits depleting after a rather short timespan, but I don't know how regeneration works. Beta islands could have a faster respawn rate, like 1.25x times as fast?

Though I guess resource shortages will grow to be a problem.

We will never know how much these rates will affect a big population, of course.  Thats the biggest problem with only adding more resources on beta islands in bigger deposits, because its so dependent on the population.  If you raise or lower yields, it will ALWAYS be this way.  Sure, it makes things a bit more predictable (which I dont like actually), but its much easier to forsee its affects.

Even if we reduce deposit sizes on alpha to try to see things get depleted faster, we still cant be sure it will be enough to get people to beta to get better deposits closer to terminals.

Of course, I'm not stuck on any idea that I will never change my mind, but I do want to see some benefit to risking your ass mining in a pvp area.  Not to give more pvp targets, but to have more f*cking choices when mining.

Last edited by Neoxx (2010-08-13 18:29:45)

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

Take a page from EVE (sorry, don't kill me) and create 5% and 10% grade stuff.  That way you can repopulate nodes with better grades of stuff without having to shift around the distribution of the actual ore.  If your scanner was particular accurate (say, level 5 in basic geology to see the first grade and level 5 in advanced geology to see the second grade) you could pinpoint the resources on the heat map.

You could have Titan Ore, Condensed Titan Ore, and Dense Titan Ore (yes I wasn't creative, deal with it).

When you do an area scan instead of saying 50% Titan ore, it could say 35%, 10%, 5% base/condensed/dense.  In a beta island, such a scan might be 10%, 20%, 20%.  When the mining field is spawned, it follows this distribution and randomly assigns each tile a different resource.

You could then refine the compacted ore back into base titan ore - that way you wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel at the refinery.

Example ....

Titan Ore - Leave this alone
Condensed Titan Ore - Every batch of 100 units refines to 105 Titan Ore (or 110, or whatever)
Dense Titan Ore - Every batch of 100 units refines to 110 Titan (or 120, or whatever)

It would be an 'easy' way to program in a gradient to mining and reward people for taking risk by reducing the scarcity or better grades of resources.  You could even go so far as the farther you are away from the primary station on an alpha, the better - it really opens up the possibilities.  The reality it, with only 2 plants and 6 minerals there just isn't a lot to work with without expanding the variety of resources.  Shifting resources to beta exclusively will damage the production economy.

Creating grades seems like an obvious compromise.

124

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

I like that idea.

I really have NO point of reference from stEVE, but this sounds like a good way to do things.  It allows some high end miners capability on alpha, but also limits them if theres not a ton of dense ore to go around.  If you have low amounts of high end miners capable of finding all the dense ore, then it may be ok, but with smaller population fluctuation the game will change.

Not sure about the exact numbers associated with this, though, but thats not what this is about.  I like how that idea sounds.

Everyone else?

Re: Lower Mining/Harvesting Yield on Alpha

totally love it! great idea to unstick miner's arses bots outta highsec alpha's
also seems pretty good for coming territorial wars system

Last edited by Rooter (2010-08-13 20:23:45)