Remove Drainable Mining

[Eris The Goddess]

Just letting you bunch know we've noticed this thread and are currently discussing it. We'll see how it goes.

Good suggestion by the way.

thnx.. As usual you agree with me *cough* (If ya cant take the comments, why bother to look in your own mirror? Ignorance has overcome to you my friend who bastille people for so called messing up their own gameplay. Keep to the rules. or Chao will come upon you)

Jack, i am glad you agree that less mining fields are needed. I calculated a lot of IMG fields. lets replace those to other factions? think a faction would not need more then (lets say) 5 fields? I would make it something like 4, but who am i talking too? ignorant people? Who do after 1,5 years still the suggestions i made? Start living in the future, not stick into the past..

---

User was banned for: Duvelske
Time left: (Permanent)

[.Gypsy.]

No need to over complicate things with cycles, removing/adding fields blah blah.. Just set the fields to constant ore drop rates.

---

[Pel]

No need to over complicate things with cycles, removing/adding fields blah blah.. Just set the fields to constant ore drop rates.

Agreed, I am behind this idea now. I'm sure no one paid my suggestion any mind

[Karst]

The issue here is a discrepancy between ambition for the game and the actual reality.

I really like the idea of encouraging people to move to little-known fields, and those that do getting appropriately rewarded in the form of better drops.
The problem is, with a universe of that size and a player count not surpassing 100 for the majority of the day, spreading activity around more simply isn't good for interactions.
I do also agree with those that have said there are simply too many mining fields overall, given the number of players.

So while this is a feature I think is cool in theory, with the situation we have we'd be better off without it.

Also:

I know there are more commodities, e.g. do we really need the distinction between scrap and premium scrap?

Yes we do, because unlike IMG which has viable bonuses on 6 different ore types, Junkers and ALG only have those two different commodities to mine. (disregarding toxic waste mining which was ruined in .87)

---

[Jack_Henderson]

I know there are more commodities, e.g. do we really need the distinction between scrap and premium scrap?

Yes we do, because unlike IMG which has viable bonuses on 6 different ore types, Junkers and ALG only have those two different commodities to mine. (disregarding toxic waste mining which was ruined in .87)

Alright. Point taken.
I guess every mining faction can easily name one ore they can do without and cut down on a mining location that is doubled, if they are willing to actually give up something they had.

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Echo 7-7]

Keeping the commodity variety makes it easier to cut down on the number of mining fields while maintaining diversity and a spread of fields across Sirius. For example, we could make a rule that every Ore can only be mined in two systems at most. There's also the lore to factor in as well, as each mining corporation ought to keep their particular specialty.


Down-edit:

Please make Iridium a worthy mining mineral. And buff prices for it. Make it only available in the Omicrons to bring back life to them. I know it's offtopic.

It's not that off-topic; mining needs a near-total review, as the current system is the result of several generations of mining gameplay piling up and resulting in the current convoluted mess.

---

There was a sig here, once.

[Scumbag]

Please make Iridium a worthy mining mineral. And buff prices for it. Make it only available in the Omicrons to bring back life to them. I know it's offtopic.

[OllO]

Please make Iridium a worthy mining mineral. And buff prices for it. Make it only available in the Omicrons to bring back life to them. I know it's offtopic.

Like.

add some taste for omicrons....simply put a nomad gunboat npc around the field there....so we could use some challenge and team play!

[Pavel]

I voted yes, removing field depletion means more miners/traders attracting pirates.




I'm against removing mining fields in favor of few selected. They provide variety of mining for factions and it'd be sad sight to see them gone.

However, what could be done, is periodic buffing one ores/fields at the expense of anothers.

Let's say Copper ore price and droprate in Omega-7 are nerfed by half, and the difference is given as a periodic buff to Raw hydrocarbons in O-3. After some time it's changed again. If faction wants to mine Copper in O-7 again, it can after local ore nerf/buff period passes.

No fields and roleplay options are lost, while buffing one fields at the expense of others practically gives results which total removal would provide.




Naturally it cannot be another "few months long 2 weeks of Silver Ore buff", and I'm happy Jack pointed it out.

Short-term local rebalance is healthy as it stimulates certain areas and factions for activity, long-term rebalance harms other factions and zones without the buffed ore fields/bonuses.

[Scumbag]

It's not that off-topic; mining needs a near-total review, as the current system is the result of several generations of mining gameplay piling up and resulting in the current convoluted mess.

Well then, why don't we just give up on the ore commodities and have the miners just mine the raw product. Remember that we have lore around mining ships with refining capabilities. And we lose the absurdity of the ore costing more than the refined product.

We can buff the buying price for the stations that are selling refined metals now so that we can keep the advantage for miners and the same selling profits that ores have now. This way mining profits would stay the same, only the commodity name would change. And traders would have high risk commodities with high buy and sell price. The only disadvantage would be the the loss of roleplay capabilities of ore processing plants.