Mining Yield Modifications

Complain about the nerfs here
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

492

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Sun Apr 04, 2021 5:30 pm

For balance, dont forget Autonite will get very efficient to mine with a silicon filter (80% Si) and 5 times the yield we get of nio and tin. Basically max LM price * 5 equals minimum price for nio and tin, since it becomes more profitable to mine autonite at that point, pumping even more money into our eco.
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.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Mon Apr 05, 2021 3:34 am

Loke wrote:For balance, dont forget Autonite will get very efficient to mine with a silicon filter (80% Si) and 5 times the yield we get of nio and tin. Basically max LM price * 5 equals minimum price for nio and tin, since it becomes more profitable to mine autonite at that point, pumping even more money into our eco.


The LM prices for U will be adjusted a bit. It is too high.
"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 » Mon Apr 05, 2021 11:06 am

Sorry for yet another post from me here, but its really complicated so I needed the timeand discussion to see the whole picture (first day I thought .85 would be good, now I see what a disaster that would be :lol: )

RAM, the formula/sheet you posted in first post here, is that the exact formula for how it will be implemented? Or is it your interpretation of the concept Jam came up with? Im wondering cause I would like to make an accurate yield calculator for the nerfed yield as well. And the rounding of days before even starting the yield formula, Im struggling to see how much that matters.


RAM wrote:He also seemed open to extend the visual size growth.
Im very happy about this, hopefully the burn time gets delayed to. I would like to be able to keep a field of fresh roids, by mining it often, but currently thats only possible if its 100% mined every 2-3 days. If not the burn time increases so much its too much work to mine them all again. Same for clearing up starting fields at vulcan and veritas. I still enjoy going back there to just mine as much junk in short time as possible, but that doesnt really work with full burn time on most. Remember how much fun we had trying to burn 2 roids per minute while clearing it for junk? At least I used to enjoy that pre roid growth implementation. Was good practice for manouvering ships, since its in a circle. Ive also used it as a way of getting used to a differnt size ship for mining, but that might be just me.


I also took a closer look at silicon filter effect on agnrites, its a bit less than I imagined:
Image
This is the max amount I have storage for in a Lev. Same age colombite, prom and autonite as comparison. I dont think that is enough to make tin equaly efficient to mine as nio, but it certainly does help.


Would love to see a buff in early yield growth for roids too, to somewhat decrease arguments between old an new players that we have seen some times. That would increase the motivation for newer players to explore and find fresh fields vs trying to find old once someone else is growing, since the waiting time for increased yield would be shorter. I know Im asking a bit much now, we already get some good improvements here, so i am happy either way. Just wanted to mention it, since it could also make the nerf more acceptable/positive if there is a small buff for something at the same time.
The sudden drop with the currently suggested nerf with 10% at 200 days could have the opposite effect, but Im not sure how relevant that is, are some players considering mining 200days old roids? If not that issue can just be ignored I guess.
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.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Tue Apr 06, 2021 1:59 am

Loke wrote:RAM, the formula/sheet you posted in first post here, is that the exact formula for how it will be implemented?


It was more Jam's suggestion and I just used it because he already seemed to feel okay with it. He was talking 30 days and .75 but did not run numbers. When I told him 100 days and .95, he said he could do that. Just trying to keep things simple and easy to deal with.Last thing he wants is issues with the player base over something he is not initiating.

I think keeping it as simple as possible will help all around. No, it may not be perfect and Ang may still be some issues, but between the silicon filter and the nerf, I think we will strike a good balance.

The 100 days will get the smaller rocks a chance to grow a little for new players who want to mine quite soon. I really do not see that as much of an issue since there are so many older fields out there. We could eliminate the 100 days and still be fine if the growth rate doesn't diminish the yield past 50% at 4 years. I think if they are reduced more than 50% others will have a major issue.

Moon, can you run your chart at .95 and eliminate the 100 days overlayed with the 100 days and .95? Might tell us if the 100 days is even a thing.
"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 » Tue Apr 06, 2021 6:12 am

RAM wrote:
Loke wrote:RAM, the formula/sheet you posted in first post here, is that the exact formula for how it will be implemented?


It was more Jam's suggestion and I just used it
No no, I didnt mean to ask who came up with what or anything like that, sorry if I seemed that way. I only wanted to know if the rounding of days will be done in the exact same place for in game calculation, just to make my yield calculator accurate, but that can wait until its implemented.

RAM wrote:I think keeping it as simple as possible will help all around.
That would be nice, but seeing how tiny adjustments on the numbers changes yield by 2000, Im not able too keep it simple, i cant resist dig deep in the numbers :P

RAM wrote:No, it may not be perfect and Ang may still be some issues, but between the silicon filter and the nerf, I think we will strike a good balance.
Yeah, I just like looking at the numbers, and wanted to share some of that suprised me :)

RAM wrote:The 100 days will get the smaller rocks a chance to grow a little for new players who want to mine quite soon. I really do not see that as much of an issue since there are so many older fields out there. We could eliminate the 100 days and still be fine if the growth rate doesn't diminish the yield past 50% at 4 years. I think if they are reduced more than 50% others will have a major issue.
I like keeping the old growth the first 100 days, I think thats good. I was jsut coming up with an idea (I some times have too many ideas, feel free to ignore me) of even increasing the growth for the first 100 days from how it is now. To kinda buff/give something back at the same time as taking away/nerfing.
The issue I mentioned is how sudden the yield starts dropping after the inital 100 days (same thing moon mentioned earlier) and how 10% nerf at 200 days could seem a bit much when its only 30% even after 6 years (both numbers for .95). But if its very rare anyone mines 200 days old roids, that can just be ignored :) You are probably right about it being so many old fields out there, its really no issue.
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.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:30 am

Loke wrote:I only wanted to know if the rounding of days will be done in the exact same place for in game calculation, just to make my yield calculator accurate, but that can wait until its implemented.


I will get clear clarification when we finally decide and get our thoughts to Jam.

Loke wrote:I like keeping the old growth the first 100 days


What do you see as the benefit of this? I am hoping Mooncrest will get us a chart with 100 days and o days so we can compare lines. The visual has really helped me see the trajectory of the nerf. Hint Hint!! ;)
"The UNCA is not your boss!" ~ Jessica Steele
Fan Fiction from an old timer - RAM Memories
no avatar
User

scistu

Rank

2nd Lieutenant

2nd Lieutenant
Posts

53

Joined

Tue Mar 24, 2015 8:06 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby scistu » Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:31 am

Any more than a 0.95 nerf on current roids would seem problematic to me- 0.95 might be a decent compromise. If new additions give us a new way to spend resources, I think we'd regret too much of a nerf. And there's already a problem with not enough bast roids.

But, more people tending/pruning mixed fields would also increase the spawn rate- so it seems to me a faster grow rate up to 100 days and a slightly slower growth rate afterwards might make sense.
User avatar
User

Loke

Rank

Commander

Commander
Posts

492

Joined

Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:39 pm

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby Loke » Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:15 am

RAM wrote:What do you see as the benefit of this?
The benefit is to make younger roids actually worth mining. Otherwise I fear only 5+ years is worth it.
It also fits with other parts of the game to have faster growth early, then it slows down over time/gets harder. Same for research taking 1 day at class 1, but 50 days at class 50 to upgrade. I think its better to nerf more when roids are getting 6,7 and even 8 years old compared to a 3 month old one. Thats why I came up with the curved suggestion earlier, to get closer to that.
With cap 0 and no change in how fast they grow, yield would increase with 6 per day if a roid is 1 day old or 6 years old. Im aiming more at 90% of current yiled first year, 60% fifth year, 30% on the 10th year and so on (numbers could be anything, the point is it grows less over time). We dont get exactly that with cap 100, but it is better than nothing.

Visual example of cap= 100, power =0.95 and =0.9. Included my curved suggestion from earlier (with a buff in beginning):
Image


RAM wrote:I am hoping Mooncrest will get us a chart with 100 days and o days so we can compare lines. The visual has really helped me see the trajectory of the nerf. Hint Hint!! ;)

I made another sheet where it is super easy to compare different cap numbers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... d=57686826
I think its better if you go there and test the numbers you are interested in, and adjust the range to look closely on yield for first year, then change it to range over many years to see yield for very old once. Instead of pasting too many images in here. If you scroll down there you will also see % nerf it is from old yield and how much the yield increases per day.


Here is an example with 0.95 and cap = 0, 100 and 200 days:
Image
This shows 2 first years. Go to the linked sheet and adjust "steps in days" to 20 to see 4 years, 30 for 6 years and 50 for 10 years
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.
no avatar
User

RAM

Rank

Captain

Captain
Posts

1093

Joined

Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Mining Yield Modifications

Postby RAM » Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:31 pm

Long term, I am not seeing a big deal with the 100 days. It would give new miners with newer feilds a little bump while not affecting us as much. Just makes a calculator a little trickier. I guess if I figured it out it can't be too hard. Just not sure if there really is a need to make it that one step more complicated since there are so many old fields out there. Not sue who will really mine a field like that except the Inner fields. Any outer field will be ignored and older ones will be used.

This is just the open fields in the Charts site:

There are 330 searchable Asteroid Fields accessible and sortable in the database.

Most of those are old.

Vagabond-83 is like 5 years old and in sector 2,-2,1. It has Ang and Chron. Ang will yield 8000 tin each if there was cargo space. I just don't really see the need for the 100 days when we look at overall game dynamics.
"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 » Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:53 pm

I dont know what consequences it will be for different players, I try to look at this as what would be best game design and what makes most sence to a new player. For me personally it doesnt really matter what it ends up being.

This doesnt only affect Ang, col and aut. You dont find any roids with gold, prom or ADNA in that chart do you? So when you need the rare items it could matter more as even us older players might have to go searching for new fields. Again, Im not stating what anything should be, just suggesting how things could work and asking what might affect players.
I really liked Scistus post, some good points there
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.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

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