open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Total mining system revamp (touches on T1/cap manufacture issues too)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.12.26 05:57:00 - [1]
 

___

The initial thread is nearly one and a half years old (started by Nyphur, and you should at least parse the OP), and a full possible implementation was summarized (and analyzed to some degree) by me less than a week later here in the same thread.
___

Even assuming absolutely no change would be made to mission loot drops (or rogue drone alloy drops, or any other drops for that matter), changes which are strongly encouraged (but a matter for another time), the general consensus is that the current way of mineral distribution in the ores, and the way ores are spread in the galaxy are not really all that good at all.
___

Long story short (for the long story, read that thread), the idea is to totally revamp the way minerals are obtained in systems of various security ratings :

* asteroids would no longer have a single ore type (some could even have ALL ore types, some could still have just one)
* ALL possible ores would be available in ALL possible system security ratings
* the DENSITY of each individual ore (m^3 of individual ore vs total m^3 of ore in the rock) in the asteroid belts would be determined by system security rating mainly (and region secondarily, with some degree of randomness added)
* the mining speed (in m^3/cycle) would be VARIABLE depending on the density of the ore in the mined asteroid
* normal mining would extract ore volumes proportional to the density (with round-downs for integer ore units)
* mining crystals and deep core mining would provide ways to mine specific ores faster and/or exclusively out of a mixed-ore rock
___

What this means is yes, you could mine Arkonor in a 1.0 system... but you would only get 1-3 units of Arkonor per deep core stripminer cycle if you used T2 Arkonor mining crystals there, and got none if you tried to use a Stripminer, unless the asteroid would be heavily depleted already, and no chance of getting any at all with a regular deep core miner (let alone a T2 miner).
It also means you could probably get many times more Veldspar in a 0.0 system than you could get in a 0.5 system, and that on top of other, better ore.

Basically, it allows every sufficiently skilled and well-equipped miner to obtain all kinds of minerals in any security rating system JUST from mining, while at the same time allowing for much finer "regional imbalances" in mineral prices to stimulate inter-region trade while not having to succumb to the current acute Tritanium shortage (more precisely, the insane added cost on Tritanium due to logistics issues).

The possibilities are endless, and the system is easily tweakable after implementation (you only need to tweak the respawn densities and spreads of ores in asteroids of a certain region).
___

A series of other changes are interesting, yet not mandatory for the above system, and could be either added at a later date or completely ignored. Those include:

* much larger asteroids, spread across larger distances in the same grid, or even a single large asteroid per grid
* ore scanners and some ship bonuses revamped to allow different grades of ore detection on a locked asteroid
* optionally, higher-grade ore could only be extracted if detected, and scanning could be mandatory for detection
* asteroid "belts" with one rock per grid spanning many grids (with several empty grids in between), with ore scanners as means to detect and warp to other grids containing rocks
* asteroids could be composed of different layers, with outer layer being mineable by all means, middle layer only by strip and deep core miners, inner layer only mineable by deep core miners (and quantity/density/value of ore would be differentiated betwen layers)

___

Well... ?

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2008.12.26 06:24:00 - [2]
 

Quote:
Even assuming absolutely no change would be made to mission loot drops (or rogue drone alloy drops, or any other drops for that matter), changes which are strongly encouraged (but a matter for another time), the general consensus is that the current way of mineral distribution in the ores, and the way ores are spread in the galaxy are not really all that good at all.

Which there has been the last few patches. Probably to assist Dr. E in detailing how much of an effect mission lewt has on the economy. Ironically the drone mission lewt was hit the worse + orca creation and tbh almost no significant change overall has changed relative to mission lewts.

Quote:
* asteroids would no longer have a single ore type (some could even have ALL ore types, some could still have just one)

Ya in real life an asteroid can be primarily say ice or iron or nickel... but isnt entirely that. The survey scanners should be able to scan and give you rough ideas of what roids are composed of... but not %ages. So it says Veldspar-Kernite. Could be 99% veld; could be 99% kern.

Quote:
* ALL possible ores would be available in ALL possible system security ratings

except merx since it has the dangerous cloud deal related;

Quote:
What this means is yes, you could mine Arkonor in a 1.0 system... but you would only get 1-3 units of Arkonor per deep core stripminer cycle if you used T2 Arkonor mining crystals there, and got none if you tried to use a Stripminer, unless the asteroid would be heavily depleted already, and no chance of getting any at all with a regular deep core miner (let alone a T2 miner).

nah. Chance for a rock to provide ANY ark in 1.0 should be like 1 in 1,000,000 and even the the available amount to be mined would be nearly nothing.

Quote:
* much larger asteroids, spread across larger distances in the same grid, or even a single large asteroid per grid

Something like a planet's ring system for mining? Or a system wide belt; an asteroid belt much like Asteroid_belt where you warp in and then essentially need to nano around for bookmarks to find spots to mine. Would be AU lengthed; instead of say 30km length. Lots and lots of space between the roids.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force

Posted - 2008.12.26 06:40:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 05/07/2009 07:52:12

Well, yeah, amounts and distances and all that are subject to debate and taste, the idea is the sytle of the system needs to change... the particularities can be fine-tweaked at any later date after the revamp.


=======


EDIT : added a very, very late alternative.
Copy-pasting it from page #5 here.

ANOTHER alternative would be to simply adjust the portion refine of all ores into something else more suitable to the "needed" percentages...

So, for instance, you can have :
VELDSPAR : 276 Tritanium, 69 Pyerite, 16 Mexallon, 3 Isogen
SCORDITE : 281 Trit, 70 Pye, 17 Mex, 14 Iso, 3 Noc
PYROXERES : 1220 Trit, 305 Pye, 75 Mex, 18 Iso, 4 Noc
PLAGIOCLASE : 1088 Trit, 272 Pye, 68 Mex, 17 Iso, 4 Noc, 1 Zyd
OMBER : 3539 Trit, 883 Pye, 220 Mex, 54 Iso, 13 Noc, 3 Zyd
KERNITE : 5666 Trit, 1416 Pye, 353 Mex, 88 Iso, 22 Noc, 5 Zyd, 1 Mega
[...]
CROKITE : 109599 Trit, 27399 Pye, 6849 Mex, 1712 Iso, 428 Noc, 107 Zyd, 26 Mega
BISTOT : 149884 Trit, 37471 Pye, 9367 Mex, 2341 Iso, 585 Moc, 146 Zyd, 36 Mega
ARKONOR : 219672 Trit, 54917 Pye, 13728 Mex, 3432 Iso, 857 Noc, 214 Zys, 53 Mega


Or, if you prefer, we can include ALL ores and ALL minerals (actually, that's a better idea for many different reasons).
Then you'd get something like this:


VELDSPAR : 276 Tritanium + 69 Pyerite + 16 Mexallon + 3 Isogen + 0 Nocxium + 0 Zydrine + 0 Megacyte + 0 Morphite (portion base price = 2,000 ISK).
[...]
SCORDITE : 577 Tritanium + 144 Pyerite + 36 Mexallon + 8 Isogen + 1 Nocxium + 0 Zydrine + 0 Megacyte + 0 Morphite (portion base price = 4,994 ISK).
[...]
ARKONOR : 193,624 Tritanium + 48,405 Pyerite + 12,100 Mexallon + 3,025 Isogen + 756 Nocxium + 189 Zydrine + 47 Megacyte + 11 Morphite (portion base price = 3,068,504 ISK).
[...]
MERCOXIT : 1,086,272 Tritanium + 271,568 Pyerite + 67,892 Mexallon + 16,973 Isogen + 4,243 Nocxium + 1,060 Zydrine + 265 Megacyte + 66 Morphite (portion base price = 17,367,040 ISK).
MAGMA MERCOXIT : 1,142,784 Tritanium + 285,696 Pyerite + 71,424 Mexallon + 17,856 Isogen + 4,464 Nocxium + 1,116 Zydrine + 278 Megacyte + 69 Morphite (portion base price = 18,251,776 ISK).

VITREOUS MERCOXIT : 1,196,032 Tritanium + 299,008 Pyerite + 74,752 Mexallon + 18,688 Isogen + 4,672 Nocxium + 1,168 Zydrine + 292 Megacyte + 72 Morphite (portion base price = 19,103,744 ISK).

___

Also, made it into a version with adjustable cummulative percentages for each mineral (cummulative of the remainder from the higher-tiered minerals, that is).
Highest value mineral (so, morphite or whatever else is highest that is non-zero) is the first to have its percentage adjusted, second highest value mineral is second to have its percentage adjusted, etc.
Tritanium is "whatever's left".

OreCalcs v2 - XLS file, very small

GOOGLEDOCS version (not sure if it will remain functional since anybody can play with it - better get the XLS, use this only if you don't have Excel, hope nobody trashed it too hard).

EXAMPLE OUTPUT OF THE XLS:

pye 90%, mex 50%, iso 30%, noc 200%, zyd 90%, meg 130%, morph 400%, desired portion baseprice 19,103,744 ISK (same as Vitreous Mercoxit, just so you can compare to the above results).

Using those percentage adjustments, you get the "new" ore
VITREOUS MERCOXIT : 843,216 Tritanium + 172,476 Pyerite + 19,164 Mexallon + 2,330 Isogen + 5,179 Nocxium + 571 Zydrine + 216 Megacyte + 291 Morphite (PBP = 19,103,744 ISK).


Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.26 09:40:00 - [4]
 

Yes, mining need a big revamp.

The loot reprocessing is a thorny problem. Beside some post by CCP saying that the % of minerals coming from reprocessing is not so high we don't have real data but only very rough guesstimates.

Removing the loot unnamed from missions/rat spawns, even without any form of compensation, would heavily shift the isk/material ratio in the mission rewards, with inflationary effects.

Any form of compensation will have further inflationary effect if isk based or devaluate rapidly (like it happened for the LP) if it is in the form of more named loot.

Honestly I don't see a easy solution to that problem.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.12.26 09:48:00 - [5]
 

Quote:
The loot reprocessing is a thorny problem.

And that's precisely why I said "a matter for another time".
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Yes, mining need a big revamp.

So... do you agree with the general outline of the above proposal, yes or no ?
And if no, do you have a better idea ?
Or, if yes, do you have any additional ideas, or clearer goals in mind or anything like that ?

Concorduck
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.26 11:24:00 - [6]
 

Most part agreed.

Abulurd Boniface
Gallente
Legio Geminatus
Posted - 2008.12.26 15:59:00 - [7]
 

I can agree with the post.

I have just one small idea for a pure miner.

I would wat to mine roid belts in low-sec, which I am to be denied because I don't choose to fly a frigging dreadnought. For me I would like a ship that would allow me to ignore most of the inconvenience of massaging the egos of gate campers.

Therefor, give me the HOG. A boat with an unconscionable tank and a big hold. It may fit strip miners but it's not as graceful as a Hulk because it has the big, fast regenerating tank. It can't be a combat support ship and it won't fit guns. It's merely a big capacity ship for low-sec mining.

Something, anything, that will allow me to mine in low-sec.

[I know what the response to this is, I just wanted to vent some frustration at not being able to mine in low-sec]

Abulurd Boniface
ME ME
CEO

William Charmer
Posted - 2008.12.26 18:06:00 - [8]
 

Kinda show of stupidity to say that issues such as this and development possibilities for future expansions should have been thought of years ago by CCP, doesn't stop me from saying it anyway.
So many individuals have been asking CCP to fix how this game functions for several years and what do we get? New unpolished implementations... nice. I've got five accounts I pay for (which is a good deal of beer for Oveur), been waiting for some time when does my hookedness get driven over by the fact that the EVE balance is rocked constantly because of blatant changes that have nothing do to with tuning what there already is. Blaablaaflowrantrabblewhocares...
Go for the perfection at once when you bring in something new, pwwease?

For starters I would like complicated correlation matrixes in mining, chance, luck, colors, surprises. Entertain me please if I got to do this mining crap. Sure lasers makes it all sound one step cooler, but how about the rest of the stairs?

I thoroughly support advancements to the most boring, yet the most important side of this universe of EVE. Wonder how this post had been like if I was a heavy drinker ugh

Myrhial Arkenath
Ghost Festival
Naraka.
Posted - 2008.12.27 13:51:00 - [9]
 

This makes sense both in terms of realism (which is secondary at best, but always nice to have) as well as respecting game mechanics such as security ratings.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.27 14:12:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Quote:
The loot reprocessing is a thorny problem.

And that's precisely why I said "a matter for another time".
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Yes, mining need a big revamp.

So... do you agree with the general outline of the above proposal, yes or no ?
And if no, do you have a better idea ?
Or, if yes, do you have any additional ideas, or clearer goals in mind or anything like that ?



Seeing as I voted a proposal based on the same idea here 2 week ago, repeating the vote to add numbers seem a bit wrong to me.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.12.27 16:19:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Seeing as I voted a proposal based on the same idea here 2 week ago, repeating the vote to add numbers seem a bit wrong to me.

True, to a degree... at the "end-user" level, his proposal seems to be somewhat similar.

But he didn't exactly present it in a "easily digestible" format, and he's been posting semi-formed and not well though-out ideas by the truckload lately, so his threads do have a rather low visibility.
Also, he only seems to want a system where asteroids remain "as is", with easily visible "what's actually inside" features, requiring the creation of many more variations of ore types (17 additional, a total of 20 for each ore). Heck, if anything, the proposal in this thread could work even if you remove all but the basic version, since extraction speed would depend on densities (which not only could they be set to just about any degree of finesse, but would actually vary in time if specialist crystals are being used).

Bottom line, this proposal is not the work of one person but of several, and it's been sitting around unused for a long time. Just because he managed to post his less developed ideas first during this CSM's term and you supported it first doesn't mean also supporting a slightly more developed proposal would be wrong, now would it ?
If anything, he could just get the proposal here, merge it with his and see what comes out.

Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.27 16:50:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 27/12/2008 16:49:43
I agree that mining needs an overhaul. We're likely to discuss this in Iceland as there is already a proposition on the table for discussion, but I think we should keep this as general as possible and not stick to one single solution. It's likely that CCP is already working on something, and it would be nice to have a general discussion about it.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.27 20:57:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Akita T

Bottom line, this proposal is not the work of one person but of several, and it's been sitting around unused for a long time. Just because he managed to post his less developed ideas first during this CSM's term and you supported it first doesn't mean also supporting a slightly more developed proposal would be wrong, now would it ?

If anything, he could just get the proposal here, merge it with his and see what comes out.



OK, you have convinced me Very Happy

Btw: about your last part, I think that a form of "merge" option for threads with very similar proposals or arguments would be a good thing for this forum.

Something like the OP or a moderator put a by-directional link in the "primary" or "more developed/more voted thread" linking a "secondary" with the same discussion going and closing the secondary thread. That would limit a bit the clutter on this forum section.

Something in the form of "thread closed, discussion continue on this thread (link)" and "link to the similar thread named xx (link)"

That option should be limited only for threads in this forum section.


Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute

Posted - 2008.12.28 01:17:00 - [14]
 

Good stuff. Not sure I like high ends being available in high sec, it should be difficult to get the high ends in high sec, not impossible but difficult and not very profitable.

Having the ore scanner give out new results to mine makes it a bit less boring. Being able to choose what minerals I am getting is sweet.

There needs to be some more competition though, how about a nice bonus for finishing off each asteroid? That way people can try to snipe rocks that are almost out and compete with others to finish off rocks to get more ore.

Good start. Thumbs up.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.12.28 01:27:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Vaal Erit
not impossible but difficult and not very profitable

Well, considering you can get up to 366 units of Arkonor per cycle in a Hulk at max skills with the proper implants right now, getting a maximum of 3 per cycle (at densities 100 times smaller than those in deep 0.0) under the same circumstances in a 1.0 system would probably satisfy the requirement of "non-profitability" Wink

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.01.05 15:43:00 - [16]
 

I can't believe a total mining revamp has such a low profile, considering how much people cry about mining profitability as a whole...
...oh well.

Shuckstar
Gallente
Hauling hogs
Swine Aviation Labs
Posted - 2009.01.05 18:01:00 - [17]
 

You raise some good points, you got my support.


Ancy Denaries

Posted - 2009.01.05 19:16:00 - [18]
 

Any kind of change to T1 industry and mining gets my vote.

Dred 'Morte
New European Regiment
Blade.
Posted - 2009.01.05 19:24:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Akita T
I can't believe a total mining revamp has such a low profile, considering how much people cry about mining profitability as a whole...
...oh well.



I heard you can make more than 30mill an hour mining ABC in a Hulk in 0.0. Sounds fine to me TBH. 8 hours (one day of work) and you can buy a new ship. As for Empire, veldspar is more valuable than ever and newbies and assorted carebears love it. I don't think profitability is a problem. However, I do fondly remember times of 2003/2004 when you'd go to 0.4 mine Jaspet for higher profit or even ninja mine crokite in 0.0 Laughing

eWrath
Caldari
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.01.05 19:47:00 - [20]
 

A very well presented and thought through solution to a crucial problem, 1UP.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2009.01.05 20:36:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
It's likely that CCP is already working on something, and it would be nice to have a general discussion about it.


Isn't new asteroid exploration coming in March? I know CCP has talked for a long time about moving asteroids to an exploration system. I am not sure if that will be coming in March or if they will be changing any of the mechanics beyond flying to Belt-X. I sure hope they do.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.01.08 22:04:00 - [22]
 

Frankly, I have no idea what exactly they plan to have (since they're not saying much), but this version, like I already said, has been presented over a year and a half ago... you'd think they could have at least started with the first few parts already Twisted Evil

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2009.01.09 01:42:00 - [23]
 

My eyes glazed over reading the post you linked(seriously, that guy makes me look laconic), but from your summary, this looks like one of the best general mining overhauls I've seen to date. This isn't 2003, inter-region mineral movement is really easy, and thus there's no reason to keep regional mineral types. All mineral types everywhere at varying concentrations, and mining crystals let you pick and choose what to mine more of. You don't even really need varying grades, you just need varying concentrations - if a highsec roid only has 1% Arkonor, you're not going to get all that much out of it, no matter how much it's worth on paper. And it makes mining scanners useful, which is also a plus.

In sum: I like.

Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:29:00 - [24]
 

/supported

maybe a handy modification:

make the ores occupy different levels of the asteroid. i.e arkonor cannot be accessed by a regular miner untill the asteroid is mined down to 20% or so ...

similar scale for other ores ...

Sen Quenten
House of Quenten
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:03:00 - [25]
 

/signed and /supported

Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
24th Imperial Crusade

Posted - 2009.01.10 11:50:00 - [26]
 

Supported. I'd say something more, but it's already pretty much been said.

Throrris
Posted - 2009.01.10 14:38:00 - [27]
 

Supported.

Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2009.01.11 14:03:00 - [28]
 

Wait, this is essentially a way for people to obtain the rare ores without having to set foot in 0.0 or low sec.

Ummm, I'm gonna have to go with no on this one.

We need to add incentives for venturing into 0.0 and low sec instead of making it even easier for the industrialist crowd to turtle up in empire.

Make all the changes you want to how mining lasers and asteroid scanners work as a game mechanic, but the rare ores need to stay in null sec and they need to stay rare.

Lurd
Posted - 2009.01.11 14:24:00 - [29]
 

Supported

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2009.01.11 16:33:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Neesa Corrinne
Wait, this is essentially a way for people to obtain the rare ores without having to set foot in 0.0 or low sec.

Ummm, I'm gonna have to go with no on this one.

We need to add incentives for venturing into 0.0 and low sec instead of making it even easier for the industrialist crowd to turtle up in empire.

Make all the changes you want to how mining lasers and asteroid scanners work as a game mechanic, but the rare ores need to stay in null sec and they need to stay rare.


Yes, because getting an Arkonor refine every six hours will make Empire broken. 0.0 will still be far and away better at producing it than highsec. Actually, what this mostly does is incentivize lowsec better, as well as making mining at least 3% less boring.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only