Catalyst Mining Issues...Mercoxcit and Mining Efficiency over the years with mining lasers. 4 Unbonused ships

[Gerard_Amatin]

Now we’re getting somewhere. Values we can fairly compare.

Okay, so before Catalyst:

• a Deep Core Mining Laser I got 156 m3 per 60 seconds.
• this is 3.9 blocks of Mercoxit
• pre-Catalyst rounded this down to 3 blocks

And after Catalyst

• a Deep Core Mining Laser I gets 39 m3 per 15 seconds (edit: 39, not 19. typo)
  – which still is the same 156 m3 per 60 seconds if you run 4 cycles
• this results in 3.9 blocks of Mercoxit in 60 seconds
• and post-Catalyst stochastically rounds down and up, so you now get the advertised value of 3.9, on average

So can we conclude that whatever problem there was with thresholds and block sizes that you mentioned earlier was an issue before Catalyst rounding happened, and that this problem is now gone?

Or is there anything else left to discuss?

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

Umm…basic math says that

Post Catalyst.
19m3 x 4 cycles [15secs] (to equal 60secs.) = 76m3 (on paper on 1 Block)…but we know from in game mechanics its doing 1 per cycle. So 4 Blocks in 60secs. (160m3)

Now if you multiply this to 180sec. (x3) → 228m3 (total) you do this because you have to compare T2 Modulated. I set the baseline at 180 because of 2020 and AII (2021-2025) are 180sec.

But if you are still using the metrics involved…1 block per cycle. (4 in 60sec) → So 12 blocks per 180sec.

This isn’t abyssal rolled.

I don’t think Stochastic Rounding is good for baseline mining m3…bonuses…yes. [Randomization this is sensible keeps it interesting. ]

I can see where there is some issues with how this system is working. If you get within a certain m3 threshhold. Which is is being rounded to the nearest block allowance.

So in the above examples and field research has pointed out there is some inconsistency.

If you put the Deep Core Miner on a Bonused (Venture) → Its doing 1 Block per cycle. Because the m3 39.06 (in game) 39.1 (in Pyfa) is rounding up. to 40m3…but not doing anything stochastic for completed cycles. (Always 1 block) But oddly enough 1/4-1/2 cycles is showing Stochastic system.

If you put a Deep Core Miner on an unbonused ship (Reaper-Corvette) → The Stochastic system is on…but its inconsistent.

Now if you then go and run other ores you start to see this same issue. Deep Core on an unbonused ship will actually plus 1 block per cycle [example Crokite 16m3] because the system is rounding up 15.63m3 to 16m3. But if you go below a certain point like the Civilian Mining Lasers at 9.38m3…then the Stocastic Rounding starts to happen.

But, this is with a Omega Player, which maximum skills have adjusted this data into this stat. There is no implants involved etc. And this should raise some eyebrows and have some questions on how this system is working especially for lower skilled players. Because this could have artificial negative impacts on Alpha Players and lower skilled Omega Players.

Again this will also impact alot of ships and equipment outside of the Omega Heavy Barge/Exhumer sections of the Tech Tree. Again also artificially crunching down on emergent gameplay concepts…that even pre-date 2020.

If there was a main drive…would be trying to get the CPU Tf adjusted on the Deep Cores from 150Tf down to 95Tf. Just to make them competitive or optional. But as of currently they are not beneficial to overall gameplay.

Ironically CCP has buffed the ORE Deep Core Miner in Yield. You can cross check 2.29.0 Pyfa vs. 2.63.0 Pyfa. It has been changed from 40m3 for both of them…to 80m3. But again the fitting has been the main headache in not being able to use them.

You can go back and cross check all the data Like how the Modulated T2 Deep Core Miners have lost yield in m3 with the crystal change. Circa 2021.

I get the idea of the change, but I do not believe its fully beneficial. The ramifications will become apparent when alot of people can’t access certain minerals…or realize the time usage is worse than lets say barge usage. This particular change has been detrimental to Ironically the newest mining destroyers being added. Strip Miners are only Barge/Exhumer Allowed. But Mining Lasers were/are available on a variety of hulls that have turret slots. And yes there are alot of moving parts that limit that activity even in the past before Catalyst.

But also isn’t exactly beneficial for new players or low skilled Omega. It restricts the m3 and then wastes time. [Ironically the most important resource of EVE.] I don’t mind Stocastic being used for residue and bonus yields. But it is a problem that needs to be looked into.

I think it needs some rebalances…or the modules need slight tweaks so you don’t end up with people not wanting to do mining at the lower level. Because then we will become more vulnerable economically to either people going on breaks…or in the future protesting CCP doing something (this happened with the mining/industrial changes with residue initially and alot people still do not like it) cancelling Omega collapsing the mining back into the Venture/Pioneers. (Now)

The Barge players don’t have anything really causing problems…but the Mining Laser ships are kind of in a weird spot due to the new mechanics.

[Gerard_Amatin]

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

19m3 x 4 cycles [15secs] (to equal 60secs.)

Apologies, that 19 was a typo and was meant to be 39, just like your picture showed and like a quarter of 156 that I wrote. I edited my post.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

I can see where there is some issues with how this system is working. If you get within a certain m3 threshhold. Which is is being rounded to the nearest block allowance.

My point is that ‘being within a certain m3 threshold’ is irrelevant now as result of stochastic rounding.

39 m3 no longer functions as 0 when it comes to 40 m3 blocks, it functions as 39 and pretty close to 40 on average now, because on average 39 out of 40 cycles it will mine a full block now.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

I think it needs some rebalances…or the modules need slight tweaks so you don’t end up with people not wanting to do mining at the lower level.

Why would people not want to mine at lower levels now?

Besides the obvious lower yield of course, I don’t see any reason why lower level mining is negatively impacted by Catalyst.

If anything it is positively impacted now that mining yield also is stochastically rounded up so all equipment has a chance to mine blocks of ore larger than their cycle yield.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Mining Laser ships are kind of in a weird spot due to the new mechanics.

I think they’re in a great spot. Unlike before you now get on average the yield that is advertised regardless of the size of the blocks, and the new shortened cycle times are nice.

What exactly is the problem?

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Because the m3 39.06 (in game) 39.1 (in Pyfa) is rounding up. to 40m3…but not doing anything stochastic for completed cycles. (Always 1 block)

How did you test this?

I think you are wrong, stochastic rounding means it should only round up to 40 in 39.1 out of 40 cycles, or 97.75% of the cases, not 100%.

Do you have any proof that it ‘always’ rounds up?

Your further conclusions seem to build on this wrong interpretation.

The most straightforward implementation of stochastic rounding should round both up and down any partial numbers, not just those at certain thresholds like you claim.

Just wondering, do you understand the concept of stochastic rounding or should I try explain it in a further post?

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

But the problem is the definition of Stocastic Rounding is randomization so it can not be properly identified. So every mining cycle would be a variance 0-max. Now this makes sense with the bonus system that CCP has implemented, and you do see some shadows of this…with residue. (Most people just go green and use all the mechanics to make it nearly a shadow footprint now. )

But if you have two Stocastic items interacting with each other. Stocastic (Mining Yield) + Stocastic (Bonus)/(Residue) some problems start there as well. Lets say you roll a 0 + bonus yield = no bonus. Because the minimum for triggering a bonus is 1 block of any ore. (Generally pops out 2 Bonus) = 3 Blocks as my experience has shown me.

I did the tests as you requested, and followed up. I chose a ship with a much lower yield base so we wouldn’t have stacking bonuses etc. [That itself is an issue because when CCP lowers the numbers below a threshhold the mining skill multipliers also get smaller as well.]

I have made sure to keep methodology of 60-120-180sec mathematics. ( I understand we have B crystals in the mix shorter cycle times…but I would rather use A Crystals due to the standardized proportional time frame. We can track between 2020 (180sec) - 2021-2025 (AII-180sec) and 2026 (180sec = 4 x 45sec cycles as now with AII)

Also an ironic question as well. In all of this adjustment…did CCP also implement it with the mining drones? Mining drones fell out of favor post mining changes in 2021/2022 (Drones have residue) and the industrial cores locking industrial command ships to grid. Ironically they are currently the more stable item 60secs. And get to yields to about 111m3. [However they can’t engage with Mercoxcit due to coding.]

Alot of discussion pertaining to mining from 2020. Barges were from (3612m3-1974m3) just Strips. With about 555m3 Drone yield per 60sec tacked on. Forgets this zone of consideration.

I am going to test this more thoroughly with a low powered alt. Lowest skills possible. To see if this also affects AIR Program and AIR Arc missions. (I ran this new mission with full skills not really realizing at the time the full scope of the changes.) I was more concerned at the time with the changes pertaining to the Ice Mining side of the equation since the timing was just before Winter Nexus.

The main problem with the system is…if Stocastic Rounding is being done by cycle or by threshold. Further up in the replies…it does show in screenshots that in specific situations its always 1 per cycle.

[Dark_Lord_Trump]

This is all interesting academically but it seems relatively useless practically since only a fool would use an unbonused ship for mining.

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

Well we should commend the early days of EVE Online where people used “unbonused ships” to get around much of CCPs original mining economy system. Mining Battleships, etc.

But it also is a good way to test various systems of the game. It is interesting because some interesting problems have arisen.

Omega players who have played for a long time do not understand or remember what it took for a newbro to start. So sometimes you have to back to square one and check things.

[Gerard_Amatin]

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

But if you have two Stocastic items interacting with each other. Stocastic (Mining Yield) + Stocastic (Bonus)/(Residue) some problems start there as well. Lets say you roll a 0 + bonus yield = no bonus. Because the minimum for triggering a bonus is 1 block of any ore. (Generally pops out 2 Bonus) = 3 Blocks as my experience has shown me.

What??

What makes you think the bonus and yield are rolled separately?

What makes you think bonus only applies if the base yield gets at least one roll?

You’re making a lot of very strange assumptions.

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

I do have some interesting information that needs to be discussed.
All Newbros have Mining III and Salvage III by default. So we are never going to be able to test all the major changes at a “0 State.” To see how far the system changes things. Also Mining has to be Mining IV to allow Pioneers to be flown. (So you never get to test them at 0 state either.)

So a Venture with a Day 1 Alt/Newbie is going to have 14.49m3.
Crokite is going to be 16m3.

It does skip cycles…but alot lower than you expect with a Venture. Which seems to align with previous posts about reaching thresholds…where it becomes just flat 1 block per cycle. This depends on which resource you are after.

So this doesn’t make any sense.

Because its allowing me to pick up something nearly double the mining yield size…per cycle. Then it skips once…then twice.. Which still doesn’t even make up the total I have taken.

Now with Gneiss and Dark Ochre its a little more intriguing.
Gneiss is 5m3. While Dark Ochre is 8m3 Gneiss would do a 2-1 cycle…while Dark Ochre was 1 cycle. (Also notice the odd time modification from 0 ending to 1…without reason.)

[Gerard_Amatin]

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

So this doesn’t make any sense.

Because its allowing me to pick up something nearly double the mining yield size…per cycle. Then it skips once…then twice..

It makes sense if you understand stochastic rounding.

With stochastic rounding that Civilian miner of 6.9 m3 has a 43% chance to mine a block of 16 m3.

So in 43% of the cycles it rounds up and you mine a block, and in 57% of the cycles it rounds down and you mine zero blocks. Over a great many cycles this gives you the advertised yield of 6.9 m3 per cycle on average.

In other words, it ‘allows you to pick up something nearly double the mining yield size per cycle. And also skips some cycles’.

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

Still, that is not a good explaination…because we are not seeing your 43% vs. 57% because we are seeing more of a 30-70.

But as that narrows with upgrades, bonuses, implants…the Stochasitic system stablilizes to 1 per cycle [Depending ore and mining laser size.] Then if it can go over the threshold you start seeing like in ice mining. 1-2…then proportional extra.

And as special note the bonus at low skill being 200% is easier to figure out and realize how it will interact with resources. Did a test on omber. And it was doing
11-12.

Got a Bonus Roll on a 11…got 22. Ironically a free cycle as it were.

So the bonus is interesting…because it points to an interesting code thing on that front.

Its more apparent with mining lasers, versus strip miners.

[Gerard_Amatin]

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Still, that is not a good explaination…because we are not seeing your 43% vs. 57% because we are seeing more of a 30-70.

Notice I said ‘over a great many cycles’.

You only tested 10 cycles, it’s not going to be anywhere accurate yet when it comes to getting to know the underlying probabilities.

Try 100 or better yet, 1000 cycles if you wish to see if it gets close to 43% vs 57%.

After all, flipping a coin is 50%/50%, but if you flip only a few times, like 4 times, it’s entirely possible ut hits head every time for a 100% vs 0% distribution. But at reasonably large numbers of flips, like 100, it’s going to be much closer to 50 flips each, like 47 vs 53. And at a larger number stillike 1000 you may get 516 vs 484, even closer to true 50/50.

Do large amounts of tests if you wish to know probabilities, not 10.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Got a Bonus Roll on a 11…got 22. Ironically a free cycle as it were.

That ‘bonus’ is one of the new mining crits which also were introduced in Catalyst.

Notice how it gave you 22 on top of the 11 you got that cycle: it’s not one but two ‘free cycles’, or a 200% bonus yield that cycle with base crit stats.

[Christine_Creed]

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Well we should commend the early days of EVE Online where people used “unbonused ships” to get around much of CCPs original mining economy system. Mining Battleships, etc.

Yep. i used ospreys and destroyers as mining ships back in my newbro days.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

But it also is a good way to test various systems of the game. It is interesting because some interesting problems have arisen.

The issues that youve brought up here are in no way even remotely paid any attention to by the majority of miners in this game. In short, nobody cares. The amounts of resources lost or gained in this thread take too long of a time period for anybody to worry about.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Omega players who have played for a long time do not understand or remember what it took for a newbro to start.

Hmmm, yes we do, because its a memory from this game thats forever etched in our minds. The challenge was real, it was enjoyed, and doing it while pondering your next unknown decision was the thrill of it. That can never be forgotten.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

So sometimes you have to back to square one and check things.

No, you dont. Just play the game, have fun with it, and forget all that stupid little stuff.

[Gerard_Amatin]

Sometimes checking whether mining works for new players is a good idea!

But because of the addition of stochastic rounding it doesn’t matter anymore how much (or how little) yield ships have.

In the past if your ship did not mine enough to mine at least one block, or a whole number of blocks, the leftover yield was rounded down. Ignored.

This created thresholds between which bonuses had no effect until you crossed the next threshold.

This no longer is an issue.

Someone with one third the yield of someone else on paper from skills and ship bonuses now simply and fairly mines one third the amount of ore, on average.

Mining yield is now fair and possible with much more granular shorter cycle times and tiny bonuses from yield that now always have an effect.

If you get 11% more yield from a module on paper you now get that 11% more yield on average despite any block sizes or cycle times, unlike before.

Mining got better because of stochastic rounding. Especially for newbies with lower yield numbers who had more impact of the old thresholds.

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

But here lies the problem.

Stocastic Rounding would be fine…if the old mining yields were in place.

But when simultaneously shrink yields to then fit a proportional scaling of mining cycles.

Stocastic becomes a bit of a problem, especially for newer players. And this does slow down their progression.

but the assessment from the get go is artificially boosted, for the mechanics. (Because the outset of the game from Day 1 your characters are already getting Mining III. So we start the game with a already adjusted stat.

[This also applies to some other ships and mechanics in the game as well people never get to use certain things at their lowest stats…but usually start using that the mid point, but this besides the fact.]

The other issue is the fact that in order to progress down the line both for ships and also the AIR program you have to upgrade skills in a way in order to access the next tier.

Venture (Also…this doesn’t require the mining upgrades)
Which you get by default when you start.

But then the Destroyers require a much heavier skill set.

About 2 Days…at bad training set up.

But also note…that the mining skill must be 4 to start. So when you get into a Mining Destroyer you are already starting at a higher skill sets. So you do not get to feel the ship at its lowest.

And this also factors in the Mining Destroyer gets +50% hull bonus. Which means you see the skipping (Stocastic Rounding) more…which can work in the opposite direction of encouraging progression of players. IE. Venture → Expedition…skip Mining Destroyers go to into Barge/Exhumer.

Its an interesting set of problems. You can “cover it” with the bonus yields to offset any issues.

But that will become a problem later down the road in balancing or tweaking either ore or mining equipment.

[Christine_Creed]

Theres no problems here. Things are working as they are intended.

Im beginning to think that there are a lot of conspiracy theories made here. If a discord channel or anybody in that mater told you to shut up about this stuff……then its probably best to keep quiet about it.

Why do you keep bringing up the same questions in different forms. Youve been told by a highly intelligent person in this community that things are working just fine…but you keep challenging it.

Nothing about this is interesting anymore. Its a dead ■■■■■■■ horse that you keep beating the ■■■■ out of. When will you accept the fact that what you have is all youre getting.

Go mine a rock…be happy…..dont get ganked…..make isk…..be happy.

[Gerard_Amatin]

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

But here lies the problem.

Stocastic Rounding would be fine…if the old mining yields were in place.

But when simultaneously shrink yields to then fit a proportional scaling of mining cycles.

Stocastic becomes a bit of a problem, especially for newer players. And this does slow down their progression.

Where lies the problem?

That you still do not understand how stochastic rounding works?

Shrinking yields and scaling mining cycles to much smaller rates is absolutely fine as stochastic rounding can now fairly give players an average yield even if this is not a whole number of blocks.

If you call it ‘a bit of a problem’ despite my efforts of attempting to tell you how stochastic rounding works throughout this thread, I think the ‘bit of a problem’ is that your goal is to find a problem rather than to understand the situation.

Please stop trying to find problems when you don’t appear to understand the system.

If you want I can attempt to explain stochastic rounding further, but please stop stating there are problems where you simply appear to misunderstand how the game works.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

but the assessment from the get go is artificially boosted, for the mechanics. (Because the outset of the game from Day 1 your characters are already getting Mining III. So we start the game with a already adjusted stat.

Adjusted stats are irrelevant for the topic.

50% yield bonus is 50% yield bonus. You simply get 50% more.

With stochastic rounding you can now linearly boost a 6 m3 yield by 50% to 9 m3 yield even if the blocks are 16 m3. And this results in… 50% more average yield.

No weirdness, no thresholds, simply higher average yield, as advertised.

In other words, role bonuses and skills have zero impact on the system of stochastic rounding.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

And this also factors in the Mining Destroyer gets +50% hull bonus. Which means you see the skipping (Stocastic Rounding) more…which can work in the opposite direction of encouraging progression of players. IE. Venture → Expedition…skip Mining Destroyers go to into Barge/Exhumer.

Nonsense.

Players can skip mining destroyers to get to barges/exhumers if they want to do so most likely because of the additional yield those ships have over destroyers. Not because of stochastic rounding.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Its an interesting set of problems. You can “cover it” with the bonus yields to offset any issues.

Nonsense, see above.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

But that will become a problem later down the road in balancing or tweaking either ore or mining equipment.

I still fail to see how a problem exists here or will exist in the future.

Stochastic rounding has set up a robust mining yield system where no matter how short the cycles, how small the bonuses or how large the blocks people csn always get a fair yield unlike before.

If anything, it’s addition solved many problems in the future.

A funny thing is that I never realized the problem of ‘rounding down blocks’ existed for mining in the past as I never realized mining yield got rounded down at all times for all blocks, until you mentioned it in this thread. Thanks for that info!

Luckily the addition of stochastic rounding fixed that problem, which I assume was necessary for CCP to introduce the more fluid shorter cycles and useful crit bonuses the size of partial blocks.

The only ‘problem’ I can think of if I really start reaching is that a new player who now does short cycles will in some cycles mine zero blocks of ore if their yield per cycle is smaller than a single block of the ore.

But on average their yield should approach the value advertised in their ship fit. So, unless they stare themselves blind at every individual mining cycle and find it ‘problematic’ that some of the now very short cycles go without ore, even if other cycles go with a lot more ore to compensate, there is no problem at all.

[MILINT_ARC_Trooper]

The other main interest is this. The older systems.

2020 having a focus on yield…while 2021/2022-> 2025 has been yield/residue. With players voting with their pockets and ships for no residue. The new system appears on the surface to focus on cycle times. When probably a simple addition of mutaplasmids + bonus mechanics would have spiced things up.

The other major issue will come about because CCP will probably look at the data of yields within the next few months and make a decision to down tune mining further. The yield to cycle ratio with barges is a bit broken. And this is compounded by fleet boosting.

For the mining lasers its become much tighter on tolerances both in mining yields and potential problems if CCP tries to “adjust yields.”

These adjustments compound. And if you add an RNG mathematical system to the mix, this could mean if something in the program isn’t working correctly, it might be harder to spot the problem. If your stats are quartered it means any mining upgrade skills are going to have much smaller effects on the mining equipment involved as well.

The idea of Stocastic Rounding or Probability needs to be done to the bonus yields. Not the actual cycle yields. People need to have a sense of certainty of how their mining ship will work. Which the older systems provided a specific way to cross check any CCP changes. This current system has some issues and problems that are going to compound going forward. Its easier to balance/change a system that is more grounded and we know specific stats and interactions.

That being said, this system has alot of moving parts that can go wrong. Some items are showing the system is not exactly matching claims of everything being “the same” as before. Some items are overperforming, where as others are underperforming.

I also do have some concerns of potential omega lock of mining. Making it even more of an Omega concentrated activity.

The skill system due to the downside also has less impact on yields than before.
Cycle times although artificially brought down by a quarter of old totals. This situation could have been adjusted by unique modules that would grant more functionality (cycle speed/ yield volume/ range) which would allow for more granular fitting and specialization of the Mining Hulls. Currently the changes are focusing more on concentration into specific hulls.

I also have concerns that the Hulks in particular due to these changes are a bit over torqued. Getting down to 23sec per cycle. And from what I can see a Rorqual boosted hulk is throwing down at 16secs. (Under certain circumstances it goes even lower like 15.6 sec A2 and 12.5 sec B2) Although in some situations you might not even need Rorqual boosts (Edencom systems) . Which aligns with the stream evidence of very fast repeating bonuses. Which will mean they will be either the target of a future nerf or adjustment. Also the rounding mechanic is showing people things like 6% chance for Bonus in game, but in Pyfa and other information its 5.7%.

Its one of the many issues of this patch that I find a bit of a problem.

Concepts like failure fitting IE now you can build fits with failed abyssal roll materials. And how things like the gas mining side of this equation hasn’t be adjusted or modernized.

The T1 and ORE Deep Core Mining lasers are still stuck on 150Tf fitting…so they can’t be used on ships like the Ventures, Prospect with any really good efficiency or yield tuning. Due to the punishing CPU penalties. 9.38% at max skills…stacks very fast. And it doesn’t count the 200+ TF CPU failed rolls. This would be the smallest change, with largest meaning. And would ruffle the feathers the least. Allowing people to get into Mercoxcit without the fitting issues of the current systems. Going from 150Tf → 95Tf per deep core mining laser would be the most simplistic change. (Ironically the purpose of the original Venture post before it was put into this forum thread.)

Now that said, alot of equipment currently is going to have issues from this point forward. Also with lower yields this means some of the AIR program material is also going to be slower for the newbros to complete.

The Destroyers are another headache because the yields are far lower than the mining frigates. Even with +1 Mining Laser. Weirdly enough Catalyst has been a subtle buff to drones, which were kind of off the table due to their residue. But they collect alot larger materials per cycle. Which is offset at longer ranges (travel time) but at closer ranges they are fairly useful. But it feels counter intuitive that the destroyers seem to be more drone mining than intended.

The other issue is a recent patch has introduced some problems with collision models with the mining ores as well. You can get hung up on ores…which means you might not be able to warp off..this also means some ores like Mercoxcit which requires much much closer ranges than normal. Are both going to get you killed by the pollution cloud-due to collision model and rock size making the pollution cloud stand off further. (which doesn’t have a damage notification still) or hung up on collision model, IE you get hung up and can’t warp away.

In Ice Mining ironically the new system actually is a pretty nice buff for the Endurance. Although you can end up with some situations where you don’t get bonuses over a hour plus. Even with very good rolls and very high fleet boosts. Usually its 1-2 per cycle. If you have an abyssal T2 ( you can reduce the residue chance to about 11% (sometimes sub that)) Sadly there hasn’t been any upgrading of the Prospect as a secondary ice mining platform. (too long in cycles…even the Perseverance makes more sense) Its the other major hull that can field ice mining lasers.

There are a few different ways all of this could be handled.

But I have my concerns that we will have unintended consequences especially with the Stocastic Rounding system. Especially the possibility of any future adjustments probably causing yields to be higher or lower.

[Gerard_Amatin]

I started writing a response but it got rather long and also repeated most of what I said before in this thread.

So let me keep it short to a couple of points:

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

The yield to cycle ratio with barges is a bit broken.

Yield got cut in 4. Cycle also time got cut in 4. The ratio is the same as before.

Please don’t try to make conclusions on numbers if you cannot do math.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

If your stats are quartered it means any mining upgrade skills are going to have much smaller effects on the mining equipment involved as well.

Mathematical nonsense.

If you mine 10 m3 per 15 seconds now where you would have mined 40 m3 per 60 seconds before, a mining upgrade of 50% is the exact same 50% increase in both cases.

10 m3 becomes 15 m3 per 15 seconds, or 60 m3 for four cycles. This is the exact same as 50% extra on the old 40 m3.

Your mining upgrade skills have the same effect on mining equipment as before.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

I also do have some concerns of potential omega lock of mining. Making it even more of an Omega concentrated activity.

Alphas just went from 1 mining ship to 4 mining ships in Catalyst.

‘Omega lock of mining’, what are you even talking about?

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

The skill system due to the downside also has less impact on yields than before.
Cycle times although artificially brought down by a quarter of old totals.

Again, wrong.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

I also have concerns that the Hulks in particular due to these changes are a bit over torqued. Getting down to 23sec per cycle. And from what I can see a Rorqual boosted hulk is throwing down at 16secs.

Yes, that’s the bonus you get for flying a tiny ore-hold expensive Hulk and risking a Rorqual in space. Nothing wrong with that.

Why is complaining about the high yield of Hulks boosted by Rorqs even relevant for this thread?

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Also the rounding mechanic is showing people things like 6% chance for Bonus in game, but in Pyfa and other information its 5.7%.

The game often shows bonuses rounded in the UI for players to read even though the true number is used for further calculations and yield.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

The T1 and ORE Deep Core Mining lasers are still stuck on 150Tf fitting

The only thing I agree with in this entire thread: 150 CPU is indeed hard to fit.

But luckily those miners can fit a Modulated Deep Core Miner II to mine Mercoxit for only 80 CPU.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

The Destroyers are another headache because the yields are far lower than the mining frigates. Even with +1 Mining Laser.

The Pioneer has higher yield than the Venture, not lower.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

Are both going to get you killed by the pollution cloud-due to collision model and rock size making the pollution cloud stand off further. (which doesn’t have a damage notification still) or hung up on collision model, IE you get hung up and can’t warp away.

I never even notice the damage of mercoxit to be dangerous, it barely damages my ships.

@MILINT_ARC_Trooper

There are a few different ways all of this could be handled.

Definitely.

But the way they handled it here was pretty good.

It’s just disappointing to see such a big thread with misconceptions about it.