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

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Fri Apr 02, 2021 11:22 am

My biggest concern is nerfing it too much and when Stag or other heavy miners return, which he says he will, we make it too much and they rage quit.

I like simple so 100 days and .9 or .85 at the most for me. I want to soften it, but not wipe out the benefits of patience and work. Some do work the fields too. Even a light miner that managed a field before they stopped playing, on return will want to see nice yields. There is a lot of expectations to yields.

At .85 and a silicon filter, I think we will get little blowback, but much more and we will hear complaints and Jam does not want us to create another conflict. Bast will be nerfed too, so anyone with an old bast will be quite unhappy with any nerf. I plan to mine mine before this hits. lol
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

492

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Fri Apr 02, 2021 12:03 pm

RAM wrote:My biggest concern is nerfing it too much and when Stag or other heavy miners return, which he says he will, we make it too much and they rage quit.

Indeed, thats my concern too, and why I dont want to suggest how much to nerf. Its going to be very painful, but who knows where peoples "pain limit" is. I can definelty understand if someone gets mad loosing 60% of their expected yield (power= .85 and 1300days).

RAM wrote:I like simple so 100 days and .9 or .85 at the most for me.
Keeping it at the same level at 100 days is good I think, fully agree on that one. Your formula is anything but simple though :lol: took me quite some time to figure out how to work it.



RAM wrote:At .85 and a silicon filter, I think we will get little blowback, but much more and we will hear complaints and Jam does not want us to create another conflict.
Dont go below power=.85, that is already a huge nerf and might be too much for some.
Btw silicon filter has somewhat limited effect for angrite, as the alu and iron in total wastes more cargo space than silicon. If you nerf it with power .85 thats so much nerfed you wont need a filter when mining in a Lev though.


RAM wrote:Bast will be nerfed too, so anyone with an old bast will be quite unhappy with any nerf. I plan to mine mine before this hits. lol
This might add to the anger,as its unfair that some of us can choose to mine them now because we know, vs those who doesnt get the info before its too late and yield is 70% less


Edit:
I dont dare to support a heavier nerf than power = 0.9 and A=5 B=0.7 in fear of loosing returning players cause the nerf is too much.
Linear is also more painful than curved, since you end up nerfing more 100days to 5 year old and less for the even older (I think its less painfull to nerf potenial yield in the future, than loosing more of what we used to have).
Last edited by Loke on Fri Apr 02, 2021 2:32 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

gotpurplefleas

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

358

Joined

Wed May 13, 2015 6:21 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby gotpurplefleas » Fri Apr 02, 2021 12:42 pm

hi all...o/

I may not be an authoritative voice in this discussion. I actually don't think I ever was. The reason for this is that, when I failed to locate the resources of the "rares", I surrendered to the concept that I would just need to go without and to focus on the parts of the game that didn't depend on them...or I would need to coerce the player economy to acquire the required resources...all while putting aside the projects that I felt I could attain some level of success in the game. All things Ascent require time, commitment, and usually an intelligence that does not come easily to most...all of which are needed in real life as well.

My point is this...if you ever want to appeal to the "Huddled Masses" you may want to try and dumb this down a bit...add "rares" to the AI economy so that a single player with a moderate amount of time, commitment, and intelligence can hope to succeed...and be done with it. As it is, I don't think growth is out of line with a moderate effort...but there is definitely a threshold in mining that many do no cross.

fleas
gotpurplefleas
Senator of Food Court
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 2:40 pm

Just time to post these graphs
Image

Image

Solid lines represent the Current Formula.
Dashed lines represent the Proposed Formula with different nerf numbers as shown.

They show the effect of mining Beam Class and Mining Skill for a complete newbie (MB 5 and MS 1, My alt MB 10 and MS40 and myself MB13 MS 235.

There are two different Nerf Levels 0.85 and 0.95. I'm liking the 0.95 better now. The reduction is more reasonable now I have taken into account the effects of Mining Skill in particular.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Fri Apr 02, 2021 6:47 pm

I am really liking the .95 too. Could you run one at .9? I am thinking it may be okay too.
"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 » Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:12 pm

RAM wrote:I am really liking the .95 too. Could you run one at .9? I am thinking it may be okay too.

Here you go RAM.

Image

Image

Image

The Mining Beam and Mining Skill stats are:
  • Newbie: Mining Beam Class 5, Mining Skill 1
  • My alt, Pom: Class 10 Mining Skill 40
  • Mooncrest: Class 13, Mining Skill 235

A nerf of 0.90 doesn't look too bad.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:52 pm

I am really afraid if we go .90 it will cut the yield in half and we will hear a lot of blowback. .95 seems to be softer and more acceptable. I don't think we will see returning numbers like we have in the past, but if we can get 20 active new and old, that will really make the future solid. Last thing a returning player would want to see is a 50% nerf of nio and tin.

As we go forward, we will se a 60% nerf as they age, but not right now. Last thing we need to do is frustrate a returning player as we need to grow the base.

I still don't know how compressed gas and algae will develop. Not sure what resources besides ADNA will be needed. I am begging that the algae tanks be made out of aluminium. We need some use for it since it is so prevalent. But that is a discussion for another thread.

I vote for 100 days and 101days+ to the power of .95.

What does everyone else think?
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

492

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:47 pm

RAM wrote:I am really afraid if we go .90 it will cut the yield in half and we will hear a lot of blowback. .95 seems to be softer and more acceptable.
Makes sense

RAM wrote:I still don't know how compressed gas and algae will develop. Not sure what resources besides ADNA will be needed.
If we get a new use/increased demand for nio/tin/prom that changes the whole balance discussion, that means it should be less nerfed than what we currently need in the game.


RAM wrote:I vote for 100 days and 101days+ to the power of .95.
What does everyone else think?
Sounds like the safer option indeed.


I did some more changes to my sheet, added another table and graph to easily compare .9 and .95
Also made every step on X-axis 1 year, so its easier to read yield for 2 year old roids, 3 year ol etc.

Here is an example with Moons MS 235 and MB 13. Suggestion 1 is 0.95 and suggestion2 is 0.9
Image
I didnt bother removing my curved suggerstion from before cause I spent so much time adding it :P
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... d=25117574
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 » Sat Apr 03, 2021 10:16 am

The 0.95 nerf does seem to be a good option; we et reduced yield but not enough to disturb people too much. So, that gets my vote.

In all this, I'm assuming that the yield is calculated when the asteroid is harvested and those asteroids that currently exist have not already had their yields calculated. This means that from the moment the nerf is put in place all asteroids will be affected by the new formula.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Sat Apr 03, 2021 12:28 pm

Mooncrest wrote:The 0.95 nerf does seem to be a good option; we et reduced yield but not enough to disturb people too much. So, that gets my vote.

In all this, I'm assuming that the yield is calculated when the asteroid is harvested and those asteroids that currently exist have not already had their yields calculated. This means that from the moment the nerf is put in place all asteroids will be affected by the new formula.

I am assuming the same. I will clarify to make sure. Jam feels comfortable with these numbers too. He also seemed open to extend the visual size growth. I will get back with him next week. He said it was the weekend to shut up. lol Well, not his words, but his meaning. :lol:
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

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