Mining Yield Modifications

Complain about the nerfs here
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:45 pm

First off, I want to state that the silicon filter is very close to being available. This will transform mining in a major way in game. Tin and nio will be very easy to get without fighting full cargoes because of all the silicon. Same with Prom. I mean, we are getting 20k per rock with prom right now. Yes, that is nice, but I feel we have reached a place of unbalance in the game.

Secondly, I am the one driving this. Jam has listened and shared his thoughts to me. He does not want to do anything that the playerbase has not discussed and agree on. He does not want another mess like the last asteroid reset 4-5 years ago.

Next, with new and old faces showing back up, mining yields and mats like nio and tin will continue to surge.

When Jam originally designed the game, there was a mistake int eh code. Asteroids were ONLY supposed to age 7 days, not continually. Once the error was found, we all felt it was a benefit to the game and of the 7 day cap was imposed, it would wreck mining. Jam has left it because he understood, but all along asteroids are only supposed to acrue for 7 days and stop like the size stops and increased mining time stops at 7 days.

That being said, I felt there needed to be a cap and with the silicon filter, this is a good reason to bring in a cap. Jam suggested something else. He suggested they age regularly for a set number of days, then have diminishing returns over time using a exponent to allow that to ramp down over time.

I developed a spreadsheet to show what he was talking about. I will post a link here for anyone to play with.

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AhX1GwUyjobi-Vd54olCVBcG1JUV?e=q3O3of

Image

This will give us an active sheet to play with and discuss. It should be locked so the formulas are set, but the perimeters can be changed. All the yellow fields can be changed. Play with it and see what numbers look fair and bring balance back. 20k prom per rock is just out of site. It is supposed to be rare. I plugged in mining beam of 8 and mining level of 100 to give us an average. Feel free to adjust, but the real modifiers will be the cap days and the exponent.

What this does is reduces the age to the power of .85 or whatever we want to look at after a set time. So we could go 1 or 1000 days that they grow the exact same. After a certain point, the age is modified and reduced over time. The longer the more the reduction. This means that asteroids never stop growing, but as they progress, they grow less over time.

Yes, this is really reduce the yields of old fields. We have to be fair and honest. With one good ang or Col field as it is, we can bring in 150-200k of nio and tin. This just about eliminates the need for miners.

Yes, we will need loads of nio and tin to build ships to haul atmo, but Jam is going to allow gas compression and this will mean that if we get a 100 to 1 ratio, one ship can move the gas of 100 existing ships.

Again, this is all about balance and good game play. Yes, these reduced numbers really look harsh to us now, but remember we were supposed to have a 7 days growth. What we have is a whole lot better.

So am I opening up a hornet's nest here? If so, know I am doing this and initiating it because I honestly think it is best for gameplay and overall enjoyment. With the silicon filter, tin will no longer be an issue.
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:56 pm

Just to make sure everyone is understanding the base number. Here is a quick list of the most important resources.

Colombite base is 4 tonnes of niobite.
Angrite base is 4 tonnes of tin.
Promethicites base is 10 tonnes of Promethicite.
Autunite base is 20 tonnes of Uranium.
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
User avatar
User

Mooncrest

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1830

Joined

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:19 pm

Location

MITH Menzel 3

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Mooncrest » Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:08 pm

I am all for this style of asteroid growth. We have gone through a period of, hopefully, abnormal play where lots of players, including myself, have stopped playing for a few months/years at a time. We are now in the position where the asteroids are so big even one can fill the hold of a Leviathan. The Silicon Filter is a very good idea and I look forward to its implementation. However, the yield of an asteroid cannot increase at the same rate indefinitely. I agree that, after a certain period of time, the initial growth rate should be reduced; this will reflect the reduction of material available as it is accreted to the existing asteroids.

I think any interested players should play with the spreadsheet and report what values they think are suitable.
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

493

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Tue Mar 30, 2021 9:42 pm

I really like the idea of decreasing yield growth with time, thats a good way of balancing I think. Especially how it decreases the differences between newer players and those returning after a long time (stupidly good yields for not playing for 5 years is a weird reward).

A heavy nerf is a good thing, we have plenty or too much of everything except yttrium and sewage currently (I would like a lot more nerfs for other things too, but Im not gonna spam this thread about that). I just hope that nerfing prom doesnt create a shortage of it and motivates more griefing again, Ive seen enough unhappy players over that before. For nio and tin that shouldnt be an issue.

From the spreadsheet I see that older than 2 year roids will give less than 50% of what they do now, and for 4 year old roids its down to 39% of current yield. Its a big nerf, but with current ships, that might be whats needed. I dont really have much opinion on what the numbers should be, I fully support a big nerf to yield of old roids with max ship size being class 15. Just dont nerf yield at the same time as bigger ship is added (if that ever happens), that could lead to similar issues as we saw after field reset.

RAM wrote:This will give us an active sheet to play with and discuss.
If you add a prosentage of new yeild from old its a bit easier to see how much it changes

RAM wrote:I plugged in mining beam of 8 and mining level of 100 to give us an average.
The suggested change doesnt care about those values, it only changes yield compared to age of the roid after 100days (or whatever number you put in as cap).

RAM wrote:The longer the more the reduction. This means that asteroids never stop growing, but as they progress, they grow less over time.
I think that fits well with the game and is good for balance.

RAM wrote:So am I opening up a hornet's nest here? .... I honestly think it is best for gameplay and overall enjoyment.
Relax, I think we all want changes that are good for the game, not benefit us as players in the game. All my suggestions for changes has always been to improve the game not to gain on it myself (politics part of forum is different, but thats role play, not me saying how I think the game should be).


Really looking forward to tin being as easy and enjoyable to mine as nio, I think thats a very important change.


I have one consern though, since there is plenty of grown fields, the nerf will not make anything more rare. At least not initially. Its mostly a nerf that means more grinding, as in twice the time spent mining for the same amounts. We are not short on grown roids, so its not gonna give a feel of them being rare, including prom. Not saying its bad or good, but it might have a different type of effect on the gameplay than intended (not talking about balance, but reasons its enjoyable to play or not).



I have one related request, can we please please please change the 7 days a roid uses to grow in size/mass/burn time to the new cap/100 days? It takes quite some time to mine all roids in a field, and it would be great to be able to continue in the same field a week later. Currently thats impossible because we cant see a difference between 5 days old and 3 years old roids. Would open up the possbility to mine just a few now and then, would make mining more enjoyable and less grindy. Would also be less confusing for new players. I REALLY hope for a adjustement to this :D
Callsign: Fraaggii or Loke
Mining yield calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0
RAM wrote: Loving the SiFi but Loke got his first.
User avatar
User

Mooncrest

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1830

Joined

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:19 pm

Location

MITH Menzel 3

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Mooncrest » Thu Apr 01, 2021 9:34 am

Loke wrote:I have one related request, can we please please please change the 7 days a roid uses to grow in size/mass/burn time to the new cap/100 days? It takes quite some time to mine all roids in a field, and it would be great to be able to continue in the same field a week later. Currently thats impossible because we cant see a difference between 5 days old and 3 years old roids. Would open up the possbility to mine just a few now and then, would make mining more enjoyable and less grindy. Would also be less confusing for new players. I REALLY hope for a adjustement to this :D


I agree with this, but would like to add an amendment so that the mass of an asteroid truly reflects the age of the asteroid. At the moment the mass of asteroids over 7 days old seems to be completely random. It is usually possible to tell if an asteroid is less than seven days old because its mass is, usually, less than 4million tons, but this is not always the case, as I have had asteroids that are 4million tonnes plus that have produced yields which suggest that they are less than 7 days old. If the mass of the asteroid reflects the age of the asteroid then it would be much easier to identify the asteroids to harvest.
User avatar
User

Mooncrest

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1830

Joined

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:19 pm

Location

MITH Menzel 3

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Mooncrest » Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:46 pm

I've been playing with the suggested new formula and have produced the graphs below.

I have taken the base yield of Tin with Mining Beam Class 1 and Mining Skill of 1, just to get some numbers, but the actual yield will depend on your personal Mining Skill and your Mining Beam Class. Because Mining Skill, Mining Beam Class have a linear effect on actual yield they are irrelevant when what we are attempting to do is compare the current yield over time with the proposed yield over time.

The Tin Yield graph gives an idea of how the yield will reduce in physical terms and the Yield Percentage graph provides the comparison of the drop off over time.

Tin Yield Graph
Image

Yield Percentage Graph
Image

As can be seen, with an exponent of 0.85, the yield drops to 50% of current after 600 days and to 40% of current after 1200 days.

However there is a fast drop in the beginning. I would prefer the curve to go the other way, rate of reduction increasing over time, and am trying to figure out how to do that and still keep the formula fairly simple. In this way there should be a fairly obvious 'optimal' time to harvest and no little 'reward' for not playing for several years. The trouble is I've forgotten most of what I ever knew about graphing functions to remember what sort of function will give this type of curve. Any mathematicians around????
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

493

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:34 pm

Thx for very nice % graph Moon, much easier to see the impact of the nerf.
0.85 is the one tha makes most sense to me.
0.80 drops very fast, looks like around 14 months and you only get 50% of waht you get now, might be too much.
0.90 stays above 50% for the whole graph, I dont think that is enough of a nerf, still too much yield on very old roids.



Mooncrest wrote:However there is a fast drop in the beginning. I would prefer the curve to go the other way, rate of reduction increasing over time, and am trying to figure out how to do that and still keep the formula fairly simple. In this way there should be a fairly obvious 'optimal' time to harvest and no little 'reward' for not playing for several years. The trouble is I've forgotten most of what I ever knew about graphing functions to remember what sort of function will give this type of curve. Any mathematicians around????

I agree, that would be even better. As long as the yield never stops increasing, just slows groth more and more (if it gets to almost 0 growth after something like 10 years thats fine though). Then its up to each player to decide whats a good yield vs growth efficiency for a field. That should be a good game mechanic/balance.
I dont see how to easily adjust the formula for it though.


Edit:
I played around with the formula and added a a couple of factors to make it curve. Added to the mining yiled calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... d=25117574
If anyone is interested you can play around with the values. Change "steps of days" to see different ranges of days of roid age.
If you increase "A" the growth in yield starts steeper and increases yield for young roids.
If you decrease "B" it curves downwards to nerf older roids more.
I actually think its a good change to have it increase faster in the beginning than currently, and then curve to lower values then we get now.

Example of values that I think could work: A =6 and B = 0.63

The % coloumn in the table shows how much new yield is compared to old.
Hope it can be useful, let me know if something is confusing or I screwed up something


Examples:
Image

Image

Image

Image
Last edited by Loke on Fri Apr 02, 2021 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Callsign: Fraaggii or Loke
Mining yield calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0
RAM wrote: Loving the SiFi but Loke got his first.
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

493

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:53 am

Added RAMs original suggestion to the spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... d=25117574
Added to the same chart for easy comparing. Uses the same numbers everyone can change in the yellow cells. Plus the cap and power in yellow cells above the numbers for RAMs suggestion further down in the spreadsheet.

So far I like the numbers A=4, B=0.7 cap=100 and power=0.87
That gives same yield at 100 days for all 3 alternatives and my curved suggestion and RAMs are almost the same again at 2000 days (curved gives higher yield before this but nerfs harder after).

I really like how the curved one gives higher yield for younger roids, makes it not totally stupid to mine a 1 month old roid. Should be better for newer players that dont have old fields.
Its gonna hurt to loose 60% of the yield I am used to, but I think it will be more fun to mine when I keep mining 10-20 roids and not have to unload every 3 roid like now. Maybe even mine in the bow again. This nerf should make mining a bit more enjoyable again.

I feared my curved suggestion was a bit too complicated, but looking at RAMs suggestion that goes to the trouble of finding new number for days first, it should actually be simpler. Also the rouding of days in RAMs suggestion and then doing the yield calc, could lead to some funny jumps in yield caused by rounding early in the calculations.
Callsign: Fraaggii or Loke
Mining yield calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0
RAM wrote: Loving the SiFi but Loke got his first.
User avatar
User

Mooncrest

Rank

Commodore

Commodore
Posts

1830

Joined

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:19 pm

Location

MITH Menzel 3

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Mooncrest » Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:17 am

Looking into RAM's original formula further, I have realised that the curve on the graph for Percentage of Current Yield I presented is not as dramatic as it first appears. The steepness of the initial part of the graph is caused by the scale of time over which the graph has been drawn. If I reduce the scale so that the graph represents one year of time, the curve now has a reasonable gradient.

Yield plotted over one year
Image
Image
Image

Yield plotted over about four years
Image
Image
Image

What we must also not forget is that for the first three months there is no difference between the Current rate of growth and the proposed rate of growth.
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

493

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:51 am

I agree that RAMs suggestion is much better than how it currently is. Though we do have roids at almost 6 years old now, and Im not too fond of them keep growing linear and at the same speed as a 101 days old one, when they already yield around 6k. Thats why I much prefer a curved one, more nerf to really old once and buff to young once. Take from the rich and give to the new hard working pilots :)

As I mentioned, I dont have strong opinions on what the numbers/nerf should be, but I am very interested in how its calculated (linear vs curved etc). That matters much more in my opinion. Either way it is an improvement over the current one.

Edit:
Added a couple of more graphs to the sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... d=25117574
Makes it easier to compare RAMs formula to the curved one.
Callsign: Fraaggii or Loke
Mining yield calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0
RAM wrote: Loving the SiFi but Loke got his first.
Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB ® | Style by KomiDesign | Modified by Chris Valleriani
cron