| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Kivak Wolf
Caldari
Lions of Judah Incorporated
   |
Posted - 2010.05.16 01:49:00 -
[1]
I have read in places that indicate that the planets will have diminishing returns on resources. Therefore, by theory, you make a couple extractors on a planet in a high concentration of base metals. But over time, that concentration goes down and down until finally there is none left. Then you move your extractors. Process continues until the planet completely runs out of base metals.
First... is this true?
Second... If it is true, how long does this seem to take? I haven't seen it myself and I've been on the test server quite a bit - granted CCP is trigger-happy with their nukes. -.-
Thirdly... if this is true, WHY!? Seriously... And don't tell me "well planets will run out of resources" when MOONS DONT, and heck, asteroid belts replenish few days/hours!
If they don't awesome! I am still happy. :D
*flamesuit on*
_________________________________________________
-Kivak Wolf-
Creator of the Opaxse POS Designer |
ihcn
|
Posted - 2010.05.16 02:10:00 -
[2]
When the resource gets depleted in an area, it gets redistributed everywhere else. The total concentration on the planet always syays the same, it just moves around. It never actually runs out.
|
Kivak Wolf
Caldari
Lions of Judah Incorporated
|
Posted - 2010.05.16 06:58:00 -
[3]
That seems a lot more fair. I can live with that. :)
How long does it appear to take for depletion? Are we talking a few days? weeks?
_________________________________________________
-Kivak Wolf-
Creator of the Opaxse POS Designer |
|
CCP Incognito
|
Posted - 2010.05.17 08:19:00 -
[4]
There appears to be some wrong information floating around.
A) Yes there is depletion, the more extractors that are in an area the faster a resource depletes. How fast depends on how many extractors and what kind of deposits you use. There is a 'ideal' number of players for each planet based on factors I am not going to reveal.
B) Resource regenerate over time.
C) There is a minimum resource level, it is defined as a percentage of the initial un-depleted value.
D) There is no redistribution of resources, it works like a hole. You dig a hole with extractors and it fills back in over time. If you dig at the same rate as it refills the hole it will never empty.
Hope this clears things up.
-----
I am a programmer, not a designer, all design comments are just speculation and have no grounding in fact! |
|
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.05.17 15:30:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: CCP Incognito
There appears to be some wrong information floating around.
A) Yes there is depletion, the more extractors that are in an area the faster a resource depletes. How fast depends on how many extractors and what kind of deposits you use. There is a 'ideal' number of players for each planet based on factors I am not going to reveal.
B) Resource regenerate over time.
C) There is a minimum resource level, it is defined as a percentage of the initial un-depleted value.
D) There is no redistribution of resources, it works like a hole. You dig a hole with extractors and it fills back in over time. If you dig at the same rate as it refills the hole it will never empty.
Hope this clears things up.
Yep.. we already got the idea as you guys talked about pre-rendered maps.
So if we find a hotspot on the planet it will stay there forever.. like moons with their material.
Don't like it very much.
Sooo.. any hints why the early version of 'moving hotspots' has been plugged? To much processing power needed serverside?
I'm a bit unhappy that the concept of 'wear' is not really inbuilt into eve. Yeah we got competition for resources.. but wear? - not really.
Anyways, thanks for celaring this up. Saves us much time to test this out.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
|
Posted - 2010.05.17 15:42:00 -
[6]
If I had to guess it is because moving hotspots is n incredibly unnecessary feature that just creates an additional level of complexity and hassle for no real reason.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Kivak Wolf
Caldari
Lions of Judah Incorporated
|
Posted - 2010.05.17 16:06:00 -
[7]
Originally by: CCP Incognito
There appears to be some wrong information floating around.
A) Yes there is depletion, the more extractors that are in an area the faster a resource depletes. How fast depends on how many extractors and what kind of deposits you use. There is a 'ideal' number of players for each planet based on factors I am not going to reveal.
B) Resource regenerate over time.
C) There is a minimum resource level, it is defined as a percentage of the initial un-depleted value.
D) There is no redistribution of resources, it works like a hole. You dig a hole with extractors and it fills back in over time. If you dig at the same rate as it refills the hole it will never empty.
Hope this clears things up.
Thanks for clearing up the fog. For a while, it didn't seem like anyone really knew what was going on. :)
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
If I had to guess it is because moving hotspots is n incredibly unnecessary feature that just creates an additional level of complexity and hassle for no real reason.
I agree, moving blobs cause unnecessary redistribution of pins and needles - very expencive in the long haul. And for people who micromanage their planets well, they should be able to maintain a healthy resource concentration long term.
CCP trying to promote planetary sustainability? :O!
_________________________________________________
-Kivak Wolf-
Creator of the Opaxse POS Designer |
Steve Thomas
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.05.17 18:41:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Steve Thomas on 17/05/2010 18:40:57
Originally by: Tres Farmer
Yep.. we already got the idea as you guys talked about pre-rendered maps.
So if we find a hotspot on the planet it will stay there forever.. like moons with their material.
Don't like it very much.
Sooo.. any hints why the early version of 'moving hotspots' has been plugged? To much processing power needed serverside?
the impresion I got was what was happening was they kept changing out the resouce maps as they generated new ones, and they kept randomly reseeding the maps to worlds as they went Quote:
I'm a bit unhappy that the concept of 'wear' is not really inbuilt into eve. Yeah we got competition for resources.. but wear? - not really.
Anyways, thanks for celaring this up. Saves us much time to test this out.
heh PvP means things blow up faster than they can wear out.
look on the bright side, its not SIMs in space where you have to stop and eat sleep or poo every 15 minuets just to keep the game realistic.
that and your part of a corp all the time, the way I see it since my ship and poses each has a crew . . .
a) they bloody well better be on top of the maintinence, after all Im the one signing the paycheck!
and
b) all cash and loot that I recive is my share after taking out expenses for things like payroll, maitinence, rent, and other expenses, let someone else deal with all that paperwork. Il handle the profit and reinvestment.
*.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.*
a (Long) Guide to Pi
|
Larinioides cornutus
|
Posted - 2010.05.30 17:55:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Larinioides cornutus on 30/05/2010 17:59:05
I have posted a similar topic but no one cared. so I'm gonna squeeze it in here
Assume initial deposit has been depleted, how are resources split between stacked extractors.
It's not as convenient to be done as roids (dump in a large batch at DT, first come first served) because colonies are much less mobile then hulks, and there are colonies that last through multiple DTs. On highly colonized planets, this'd lead to cases where planet is quickly mined during its first few hours after DT and there'd be nothing else to be done for the rest of the day (Ala WH syndrome) Even if resource is dumped on smaller time frames like every hour; on even more competitive planets with multiple 30m colonies this will eventually be an issue and thus isnt a good scalable model.
It's probably not done like exploration (new deposits spawned elsewhere when old one depleted, finder keeper) because deposit locations are static.
No it doesnt work like those above.
And thus here's my theory: Planet resource is added between small interval, let's say per hour, cached and spent before deposit is tapped. When an extractor take resource from this pool the actual resource extraction is equal to either:
1) (extraction rate)*min(1 , planet growth/total extraction rate per growth)
2) (extraction rate)*min(1 , planet growth/amount of extractor present)
This way, extrators are almost always guaranteed to obtain something during its cycle. However the 1st formula give them an equal % extraction rate while the 2nd formula give them an equal numeric extraction rate. The 2nd formula thus favor colonies with slower cycles and I think it's more likely the one used.
It'd be nice if a blue poster can verify :(
|
Ohnus
|
Posted - 2010.05.31 14:51:00 -
[10]
One thing that is not clear.
Is the resource regeneration per hot spot, or is the regeneration global?
|
|
|
Minuki Zedra
Omega Engineering Inc.
R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 13:01:00 -
[11]
From my time experimenting with PI, I believe:
1) Each planets surface is covered with a number of invisible points, at which a value for each Resource available on that planet is stored in game.
2) Extractors calculate their available yields on survey from the relevant Resource value of one or more of the closest points, maybe adjusted for distance from that point or points.
3) Each cycle the Resource value of these points will be decreased by any Extractors gathering that Resource accordingly.
4) Every hour (or half hour, or at downtime, open to a lot of speculation) the Resource values at all points across the planets surface will regenerate towards their original maximums.
|
Ohnus
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 19:29:00 -
[12]
What I meant was, if you have a hot spot with 20% saturation, and one at 80% saturation on the same planet, will they regenerate at the same rate based on the planets global resource abundance, OR, will the 80% saturation hot spot regenerate 4x as quickly as the 20%?
|
Larinioides cornutus
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 19:38:00 -
[13]
An another question is how are wasted resource handled. We know that if extracted materials cannot reach its routed destination due to full storage or road overcrowding, it'd "go away", but where. There are 2 possibilities for this:
1) The resource is harvested and really destroyed
2) It only take the resource that can go to its destination and the left over remain within the hotspot, ready to be extracted in the next cycle.
I hope that 2) is indeed the case. Would be nice if someone can verify so.
|
Ohnus
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 10:35:00 -
[14]
Also something that remains a mystery is, does the depletion of a hot spot slow its regeneration? or is the regeneration a fixed rate? If the latter is true, why wouldn't you simply run your extractors at the maximum rate? The way I understand the survey results from extractors is that longer cycle times extract more overall planetary resources simply because a longer cycle time includes a greater period for resource regeneration. There is still much to be clarified on this subject.
|
STrike3Ds
|
Posted - 2010.06.11 08:07:00 -
[15]
It is normal to refill the same deposit. Think like this, if you find a good place and start extracting, after a while if the deposit move (redistribute) in another part of the planet there is no interest in destruction of another player colony (you can wait untill the deposit is empty and find the place where the resources redistributed and create you`r colony there). If the same deposit refill after a while you will want to create you`r colony there in the best place from a planet and here i think will interact with dust (you will pay the mercenary from the planet to distroy the best placed colony and you will go create your`s). The most important think for the moment is to find the best rate to extract ... i mean, to extract at the same speed that the resources refill. This is just a supposition 
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |