| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tiglot
   |
Posted - 2010.06.29 00:03:00 -
[1]
I recently decided I'd switch resource extraction on a planet in favor of a different type of planet in a neighboring system with a much higher scan density for the same commodity. To my surprise, the yield on the new planet was lower than I was able to get on the planet I was about to abandon.
It made me wonder - do certain commodities have a 'native' planet type where they commonly have better yields, even with lower or similar scan densities?
As I write this, I'm thinking that sec status might also have something to do with it... although the systems were neighboring so I'm assuming they're at least close. I know sec status affects scan densities, but maybe they affect yields as well. I'll check this.
I always assumed that scan densities would be proportional to max yields... but I don't think it's always the case.
Anyone else notice the same?
(You'll need to take my word that I know how to scan and place extractors optimally. I do. And yes, I'm comparing the same time units.)
|
jagoff
Cosmic Cakes
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 00:08:00 -
[2]
what is your planetology skill?
if it's not 5, then your scans aren't 100% accurate. that would explain the lesser yield, as you might be thinking you are dropping extractors on the "hot spot" when really you aren't because of a bad scan.
|
Tiglot
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 01:00:00 -
[3]
Advanced Planetology is Level 3, but I do a lot of extractor crawling to make sure I'm extracting at the optimal location. Expensive, but worth it in the long run I think.
I checked the sec status to the two system. They are essentially exactly the same, differing by only 0.01 on Ombey maps.
To be more specific with my example - I'm getting much better yields of Base Metal from a Plasma planet than I am on a Storm Planet that has a much higher scan density. |
Irdia Freelancer
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 01:47:00 -
[4]
Is some variation from planet to planet even of similar sec status.
Can also find hot spots on some planets which are just better. Eg I found 2 planets in the same system, storm/ocean. The ocean planet has a lot of water and is consistently higher water to extract than the storm planet. But the storm planet has a 'hotter spot' for water even though the water available over the planet is much less.
Had a corpy look over hot spots in 0.2 system. Where I was getting a hot spot reading just over 4.5 on the scanner in 0.5, they were hitting hot spots just on 8 on the scanner (the scan has 10 calibrations across it). ie lower sec can be a lot more abundant. Of course local pirate activity likes the added transport/industrial traffic although they tend not to get much of value, just popping the ships. If a pirate tackles at the customs, just drop the cargo back into the customs, which leaves tackling at gates etc. Most PI only do P1 stuff in lower sec, ie the more valuable P4 stuff etc made in hi-sec on barren/temperate planets.
|
Nuadi
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 03:40:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Nuadi on 29/06/2010 03:43:26
What are you referring to when you say "scan density"?
Are you referring to the highest concentration you can move the scan gradient to while maintaining a hot spot?
Are you referring to the quantity bars present that you click to perform a scan?
Edit with my findings...
The bars that indicate quantity of a certain material have no bearing on the yields per extractor. I have found that a detailed survey using the color gradient (as small as possible) gives a much more accurate representation of how much you will gain per extraction cycle.
Classic example being an Oceanic planet with a very high quantity, but low concentration for Aqueous Liquids. I was able to get a higher yield per cycle on a Temperate planet with a much lower quantity, but far higher concentration.
|
Fritz Ionar
Minmatar
LifeLine Solutions
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 06:54:00 -
[6]
As I understand it, the density meters (the ones you click to get the actual heat map) just tells ju how much of the stuff is on the planet, not how it is distributed.
A low value can be concentrated in a few hot spots that provides a good extraction rate.
A high value can be evenly smered over the entire planet and thus not provide any good spots for extraction.
|
Clansworth
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 13:24:00 -
[7]
I have determined that the scan results ARE a pretty much direct correlation to extraction rate. After looking at a large number of my extractors, and guestimating their location on the scan color chart, I can say with little doubt that the extraction rate is a linear relationship with the scan results, putting a 100% 30 minute rate at about 2200-2400u/cycle. there, of course, is error in this guesimation, but after compiling many samples, the error has been pretty much averaged out. As for the white bar graphs, they appear to be a generalized average of the planets resources, but, if they are spread out widely (such as the 'bands' on a gas giant, or the vast stretches of water on the ocean planets, you may not have as HIGH of a concentration, and therefore not as high an extraction rate, as a different planet.
Intel/Nomad |
Compleat Bacon
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 13:33:00 -
[8]
I was looking at this yesterday.
The total amount as shown by the bars in the SCAN display is not a good indicator of the highest value hotspot. It tells you the total amount of the resource.
Survey Aqueous on a Gas planet. Adjust the height slider so that you are just getting white spots. Then survey Aqueous on a Temperate planet with the slider in the same spot. You will get much bigger whitespots, even though the total amount is less. (Or pick another resource. I'm doing this from memory.)
|
Ana Vyr
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 17:44:00 -
[9]
Wouldn't you have to keep the sliders in exactly the same spot to be able to compare reletive scan density vs yield between two planets?
For example, if you kept the sliders the same between two planets, would the dark red patch (just picking one density level) on each planet give roughly the same yield?
|
Tiglot
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 18:41:00 -
[10]
 Originally by: Nuadi
What are you referring to when you say "scan density"?
Are you referring to the highest concentration you can move the scan gradient to while maintaining a hot spot?
Are you referring to the quantity bars present that you click to perform a scan?
I was referring to the quantity bars present that you click on to perform the scan.
So it sounds like others are seeing the same thing. It doesn't really matter what you see on the quantity bars - your yield can still be very good or very poor depending on the hot spot you find.
Frustrating. I looked at the quantity bars of a lot of planets and decided to plunk my CC's down on that basis. It sounds like there is no good way to determine what planets are best for a given commodity.... just a best guess. You can't reliably compare the slider locations on heat signatures for different planets... or at least it'd be a real pain to do on any large scale.
To put this into perspective even more clearly with the example I gave earlier. I am able to get a yield of over 2200 units/cycle for Base Metal at a Plasma planet showing only 35% on the quantity bar, but the best I'm able to get on the Storm planet in the next system over is only 1700 units/cycle - but the Storm planet shows 80% on the quantity bar!
Such is Eve I guess.
|
|
|
LHA Tarawa
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 20:51:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Tiglot
I was referring to the quantity bars (density meters) that you click on to perform the heat scan.
So it sounds like others are seeing the same thing.
Yep. It is my experience that those are as much or more effected by the number of hot spots than the strength of the hot spots.
You have to use the slider thing to see the strength (max yield) of the hot spots.
|
CPark Finner
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 20:55:00 -
[12]
I did a bit of testing along the lines of other folks that have posted here.
The left-most column in the table is the value you get when you compress the slider under the build/scan buttons to it's smallest size and drag it until the smallest white area shows anywhere on the planet. I estimated the value above the right side of the white bar in the slider. The 4 columns are the four extraction durations.
I've found the estimates to be pretty accurate considering you can't place partial harvesters and the scans are a bit inaccurate to begin with.
Sorry for the formatting but you get the idea.
Yield by Category and Density Per Run
0.10226.92374.19274.91149.93
0.20453.85748.39549.82299.85
0.30680.771122.58824.73449.78
0.40907.691496.781099.63599.71
0.501134.621870.971374.54749.63
0.601361.542245.161649.45899.56
0.701588.462619.361924.361049.49
0.801815.382993.552199.271199.41
0.902042.313367.752474.181349.34
1.002269.233741.942749.081499.27
Yield by Category and Density Per Half Hour
0.101361.54 748.39 274.91 74.96
0.202723.08 1496.78 549.82 149.93
0.304084.62 2245.16 824.73 224.89
0.405446.15 2993.55 1099.63 299.85
0.506807.69 3741.94 1374.54 374.82
0.608169.23 4490.33 1649.45 449.78
0.709530.77 5238.72 1924.36 524.74
0.8010892.31 5987.11 2199.27 599.71
0.9012253.85 6735.49 2474.18 674.67
1.0013615.38 7483.88 2749.08 749.63
Number of Harvesters to Produce 3000 Per Half Hour
0.102.204.0110.9140.02
0.201.102.005.4620.01
0.300.731.343.6413.34
0.400.551.002.7310.00
0.500.440.802.188.00
0.600.370.671.826.67
0.700.310.571.565.72
0.800.280.501.365.00
0.900.240.451.214.45
1.000.220.401.094.00
|
Tiglot
|
Posted - 2010.06.30 01:00:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Tiglot on 30/06/2010 01:01:29
Originally by: LHA Tarawa
You have to use the slider thing to see the strength (max yield) of the hot spots.
Confirmed with my planets.
Plasma Planet - 2200 units/23 hr cycle - 35% on quantity bars, 92% on heat slider scan for first hot spot
Storm Planet - 1700 units/23 hr cycle - 80% on quantity bars, 80% on heat slider scan before first white hot spot
(And when I say 80% on heat slider scan, I mean that I clicked on the commodity quantity bar, let the heat scan take place, and then slid the rightmost triangle to the left until I saw the first white hotspot. 80% means that the slider was eight ticks on the left to right scale.)
Conclusion: To get a high yield for your extractors, don't ever go by the four commodity bars that show relative planet quantities... you need to click on each commodity individually, do a heat scan, and drag the triangle until the first hotspot... using that triangle location as your yield indicator/benchmark. Assuming you are scanning planets of a similar sec status, this will give a good idea of relative yield.
Facepalm. Wish I'd figured this out before I laid all those Command Centers.....
Thanks for the constructive feedback from those who replied.
|
Irdia Freelancer
|
Posted - 2010.06.30 04:08:00 -
[14]
Once you have the scan sorted, then it takes a while to sort your planet setups. Most players go through several stages in making a better design and implementing it, only to tear down for a better setup.
Do you go for several things produced on the one planet?
If you do this, can drop a launch pad down next to a bunch of extractors and processors, drop another launchpad un-connected with its own extractors/processors - saving the links. You also find the smaller planets have cheaper links. While planet size appears to vary, ccp set it all up with the same sized planets for PI, the result is larger planets can't cram the industry as close so have longer links using more cpu/power. I say the same sized planets, as the planet industry size is the same on a planet 100,000 km radius, or 1000 km radius - ie you can't fit any more industry on the larger planet, actually less as the distance of links much larger even when appearing the same size - so you can physically fit less extractors/processors on the larger planet as will have more proportion of comm centers.
I've gone for the 1 planet/1 product with extractors feeding processors for 1 P1 product which I then export to a proudction planet where I take it through to P4 completion. I favour the honeycombe look with a launch pad surrounded by 6 proecessors/extractors in tight formation for least link power/cpu. It seams to me there is no difference in depletion rates of having 1 extractor or dozen tightly packed so I pack them tight on what I hope is high yield. It also seams that the higher yeild depletes less than lower yeild. Faster extraction times seam to deplete more too.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |