Just to clarify, I was referring to the Proposed Column figures for the Orca in this spreadsheet that appeared in an earlier post. 
2 Likes
This is wrong daaaaaa
**Waste Probability**
Tech I Modules 0% <<<— should be 34%
Tech II Modules 34% <<<— should be 0%
ORE Modules 0%
Tech I Drones 0% <<<— should be 34%
Tech II Drones 34% <<<— should be 0%
Augmented Drones 40% <<<— should be 5%
Excavator Drones 60% <<<— should be 5%
WRONG.
Tech I Modules 0% <<<— should be 0%
Tech II Modules 34% <<<— should be 0%
ORE Modules 0%
Tech I Drones 0% <<<— should be 0%
Tech II Drones 34% <<<— should be 0%
Limit waste to crystals where it makes sense.
8 Likes
that will work
Looks like Orca with T1 core is still worse than the Porpoise?
(also could you take a look at the ice drone values, they have gone down by a lot between your two posts, which ones are correct?)
1 Like
I mistakenly thought you could launch 5 ice drones per Orca / Porpoise. Then I checked the drone bandwidth on each and saw they could only launch one drone each. So I fixed the numbers to be correct. The lower numbers are correct as are the numbers in the sheet. BTW, feel free to make a copy and play with numbers yourself. You could, for example run numbers for Orca w/o Core (which completely forgot to do, but not being a Orca pilot not inclined to fix).
that’s also wrong , they all should be 0% and waste mechanic removed form the game and never look at it again.
2 Likes
So the T1 strip miner pulls the same volume of ore out of a rock as the T2 with type A crystals? Is that right?
If not, you’re pulling a greater volume per cycle with T2. Hence mining faster.
I really don’t remember the figures from the current setup, and I don’t have time right now to run the new figures, but if that equation has changed, something has gone wrong.
even if the orca use the CiC tier 2 it’s worst than the Porpoise , not only for the mining yield but also it locks you in place for 2m30s and consume 500 units of heavy water to do so… Porpoise ? free to warp out anytime and doesn’t consume heavy water.
Really smart people working at CCP even smarter people in the CSM suggesting these changes to CCP
I won’t discard it completely. I mean, I know for sure that availability of worthy rocks is currently a number one limitation by far, and the idea of wasting them is heretical enough to grab my pitchfork against any proposition of it, but… what if there are circumstances where availability would not be the biggest limitation?
If a high waste crystal can prop up ISK/hr on ■■■■ rocks not worth mining otherwise, and you don’t care what happens to them, why not?
That said, in the “we think scarcity is over” era, availability will remain the biggest limitation by far, so it’s not like I don’t get what you’re saying.
Fixed for you.
Stop the trade-off to bad mechanic.
Just adjust the yield (if needed). Keep it simple.
5 Likes
just increase the volatility of the high yield crystals. Command burst will then have a use for the “Mining Equipment Preservation Charge” as it is now no one uses that, crystals are easily replaceable and it last a long time regardless.
Type C crystals are awesome. I’m sure folks will try to burn enemy’s moon goo, but not sure that it’ll be a popular activity. But being able to clear out ABC ore from an anom so you can mine your mercoxit and get another anom is a huge boon to miners. I’m neutral on the Type B crystals other than I don’t want to be the guy looking for evidence of using them on the mining ledger to punish the dickhead that used them on an R64. That’s not fun.
type c crystals could stay yes
1 Like
That’s the role of the Type C crystal. Others shouldn’t have it.
Just adjust the yield for any other one, if what is on TQ isn’t right.
I like the idea of one crystal type per ore group, I may think about using T2 strip miners in the future. But only if waste is removed.
Can you explain why T1 and ore are listed as 0% and T2 34%?
Is it a case that ether T1 or ORE was meant to be listed at 100%?
If not the case please enlighten us as to why these are the same, and the T2 modules are worse than a T1 module.
Even currently live server version has the T2 without crystals better than T1 and worse than ORE. While with crystals T2 yield is better than ORE, but at the cost over crystals usage.
what tsumi said below
people protested saying newbro will be kicked out of fleet cause of the huge waste done to belts , so they made NO WASTE on t1 variants , instead give a bigger waste on T2 variant cause they have “better yield” better yield just translate into “less time to mine a ore” wastage = wastage half the ore is deleted. so therefor T1 and faction will be best in class and T2 should be avoided. CCP are geniuses.
1 Like
I like the new wastage system. ( I know many others are complaining).
A new player (T1) gets their same low yield with no waste so you can bring them to help mine with no issue.
As an experienced player I can choose between :
Low yield / no waste / low cost (T1)
High yield / with waste / low cost T2)
High yield / no waste / high cost (faction)
I think this is perfect. I will use T2 most of the time and be fine because where I am there is always more and my risk is high. If you mine something precious and need no waste you can use T1 and go slower or pay for faction and risk it for the isk. This is just like adding bling to your combat ship. It gives an edge but at a cost.
5 Likes
Because we put out pitchforks specifically against this, and CCP actually did set it at 0%.
The reason is simple. In current system, pvpers and noobs can help mine the super rare precious rocks that are left in the scarcity-plagued wasteland of nullsec. But with ANY waste on T1, they would be told to gtfo instead, and nobody wants that.
CCP caved on this one, and set T1 to 0% waste, but missed the entire point of WASTING LIMITED RARE ROCKS THAT ARE WORTH MINING IS UNACCEPTABLE and even increased T2 waste, making it literally useless for any rock you care enough to mine.
Thanks for helping us getting through to them.
3 Likes