Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maplestone
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 18:25:00 -
[31]
The rate at which resources are depleted is also pretty brutal - after one 5 hour cycle, the output of the entire areas around each of my colonies was down to between half and 2/3 of what it was on the first cycle - my focused mining projects went from being hotspots on the planet to being dead zones.
It's an interesting and more realistic concept, but it's hard to get past that first impression thought that it's a lot more work for a lot less output.
|
Onibrak
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 18:32:00 -
[32]
The hotspot depletion seems to be the biggest problem here. We need some hard numbers and CCP is going to wait for someone with the time and dedication to spreadsheet reverse engineer it before they acknowledge a valid issue and make any changes.
I work in 0.0, just making effing mech parts. I found a gigantic hotspot and set up my extractor. With the exact same scan settings the hotspot is entirely gone today when I logged on.
Previously devs have stated that hotspots won't move, just empty and refill. That doesn't seem to be the case any more. Previous hotspots would deplete slowly over the course of a long period of time, now they can literally disappear if you stop and restart a cycle, which is ****ed up. I should have to actually mine for a while for the area I'm mining to go from white to green, but that is no longer the case.
Is the intent here to force us to relocate the ECU? With link cost and so on, with spending money on ECUs, this seems impractical. With the ECU cost it's impossible to spread your heads out over a larger area.
ECU needs to cost CPU only, and heads need to be what takes up power grid. With that change PI would be functional again, multi material producing would be viable again, and we could set up enough heads to cover multiple hot spots easily while still retaining the current system.
As it stands, forcing you to pick one hot spot and then having that spot deplete from white to green or yellow in less than a 24 hour cycle is making production unworkable. I used to be able to sustain 10 processors on a single P1 producing planet and have them working pretty much the entire 24 hours with repeated 5 hour cycles. Now I can't even fit 10 processors on a planet with enough extraction to keep them working with my current set of skills.
Something's gotta give, PI was going to be one of my primary sources of income, I don't mind having to move heads around a bit and stuff, but having to put the extra work in and getting less out of it than I did before is unacceptable, considering repeated dev posts saying they didn't want to affect extraction rates.
You have, guys. Badly. I'm producing about 75% of what I used to on the same planets.
|
Funesta
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 18:49:00 -
[33]
Here's the scandalous solution to the depletion problem:
After you mine out one resource with your ECU with a day-long program, swap to mining a different resource the next day. By day two, your depleted initial resource will be back to normal.
The ECUs are flexible for a reason. The schematics on processors can be swapped for a reason, too.
This is commonly called crop rotation, and it's a concept that has been around for a very long time.
|
Onibrak
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 18:55:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Funesta Here's the scandalous solution to the depletion problem:
After you mine out one resource with your ECU with a day-long program, swap to mining a different resource the next day. By day two, your depleted initial resource will be back to normal.
The ECUs are flexible for a reason. The schematics on processors can be swapped for a reason, too.
This is commonly called crop rotation, and it's a concept that has been around for a very long time.
Minerals are not crops, and stopping the harvesting of a field of corn to switch up how you're harvesting it does not make a third of the corn in your field magically disappear.
But thanks for being a condescending ******* about a very specific problem.
|
Euporie
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 18:55:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Euporie on 19/01/2011 18:55:54 ^^^^
Exactly the same issue as Onibrak, hot spots deplete in a matter of hours!!! I also am in 0.0 and now I can't sustain my P1 production no matter what. And when you have set up all basic processing facilities in one place, you would have to move the head across half the planet to get to the other hot spot...and it will deplete in a matter of 24h... Previous system was clickfest, but it worked...now it's totally broken.
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:14:00 -
[36]
@ the last 2 posters
are you getting all the stocks from your mining units? some of us at the start seam to be missing large amounts of output from what it says we should be getting and what is in launchpad at the end of p1.
|
olsted
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:19:00 -
[37]
So morning after. Not only am I not getting the originally quoted amounts (I now understand that suddenly our P/AP skills matter), Im getting nowhere near what the bargraph says I should be getting.
Theoretically I should be pulling close to 100k/hr. In reality, im not even keeping my 3 basic factories fed.
WTF? Some documentation on how this is supposed to work would be good. That way we can atleast determine if its us or the system that is broken. All we have now is observation and assumption, leading to petitons which are closed with "working as intended".
-O.
|
Euporie
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:25:00 -
[38]
Yeah, on theory the output I get from the program should be able to sustain my P1 processing but it's NOT. Not to mention that on a 5h job I can't get near the P0 I used to be able to get whit old PI. And the depletion ratios or are absurd.
|
Zircalla
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:29:00 -
[39]
It seems the 'new' (I assume) depletion rates are in place to nerf 5 hour (or any very short cycle) extracting unless you are also willing to move the heads (or even ECU). From my (albeit limited) experimentation so far, it seems that a 3-day cycle seems like it will be the best balance between depletion and production. I will tell you if it looks like I am right in about 3 days....
|
Ludacrys
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:47:00 -
[40]
OK i understand the installed amount is lower than the surveyed amount due to planetology skills I also understand the number of units per hour is the average of the entire cycle
WHAT I DONT UNDERSTAND IS THIS: second 1 hour cycle finished and according to the graph i should have accumulated nearly 60k units but on my launchpad (i triple checked all routes, links are not full either) i only have like 7k What is going on?
|
|
olsted
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:56:00 -
[41]
In reading back through this thread and checking my own colonies, I'm seeing the same behavior.
Specifically, although the extractor SAYS its extracting 100kunits/hr, the products window which lists the incoming materials ammount you make your route from only shows about 15k. That is the route I created to my Launchpad-Hub from which all of the rest of my routes go.
It seems we may have found the problem? You can extract minerals like mad. You just can't route them.
There must be tons of materials all over the ground around the extractor. Wish I could go pick em up.
-O.
|
Cergorach
Amarr The Helix Foundation
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:59:00 -
[42]
I'm currently using 17-18hr cycles instead of the 23hr cycles I ran under the old system, I'm actually producing more at the moment. The moving of the heads is more interesting than the darned clicking (even with a mouse that has a special button to double click with a single click). So that's great!
One thing that's problematic, under the previous system you saw exactly where the other PI players had placed their extractors, now you don't see the ECU nor the mining heads from the other players on the same planet. So it might be entirely possible that the folks are experiencing less output due to overlapping ECU/extractorheads interfering with each other.
As for the depletion, I think it's going to be a serious issue, I'm getting the feeling that I'm capable of depleting an entire solar system with a dozen characters or so. Would seriously hamper PI around the trade/mission hubs. Would mean folks would need to spread out or produce less, longer travel times, means less interest (folks will stop doing PI). Probably mean an increase in prices...
|
Tay Silvermoon
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:05:00 -
[43]
A couple of questions (or info it would help to have to pinpoint):
if everyone started including their skills in the issues - we could see if it was related to planetology/advanced training issues
if everyone would include information on the setup a) ecu to storage link level?, b) maximum cycle amount during the program?, c) program length? d) average hourly rate during program?, etc
Whats being reported has so many variables and so little information provided - there's not even a place to start to try to figure out what's going on. It would be nice if dev's added back in some sign on the setup if the routing changed after it was installed, since you can route it before you set the extraction cycle/rate and it won't show that there is an issue unless you recheck.
It'd be nice to know if we actually trained planetology/advanced planetology to 5 - do the survey amounts match closer for example.
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:10:00 -
[44]
just to update my post i am now showing i should have extracted 752k in p0 and be on 30k per hour.
present biomass in launchpad 550 units which is 27.5 lots of 3000 p0 =82500 p0
so currently missing 669500 p0
or taking the other number of 7716 * 20 completed hours = 154320
so currently missing 71820 p0
if i take the currently routed number of 17317 and take that per 4 hour cycle that would be 69268 p0 production,
in which case i have magicly made 13232 units from nothing.
answers on a post card
|
Berikath
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:18:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Gamingloser1 Just moved the extractor to another location.....similar results. 90k estimate....less than 62k was the initial result. So thats about 1/3 drop.
First install 90k estimate 61500 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Second install 90k estimate 60297 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Third install 90k estimate 56520 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Four install 90k estimate 52242 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Fifth install 90k estimate 48498 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle.
So the pattern is obvious. It seems like the units are depleted and wasted if you end up canceling a program.
I'm going to wait an hour and re-run the program to see what effects it has on extraction rates.
Is this high-sec extraction?
If so, I would guess that it might be a peculiar manifestation of the "depletion" mechanic. If there are a bunch of players all extracting from the same spot, you might be seeing the values change because stuff is being extracted in between your cycles, depleting the area and decreasing your yields.
*** [ SIG] ***
Wish list for PI:
*One-click input routing *Copy product, inputs & outputs in factories *Launchpad upgrades: twice the space, twice the cost, half the hassle! [ /sig ] |
Ludacrys
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:20:00 -
[46]
it has nothing to do with depletion, the ECU is just not routing the full amount, has anyone tried upgrading the links? Did that help?
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:24:00 -
[47]
my routed amount is still the same from this mornings photo. at 17317
and the link is still claiming to be only 17% used at 43.2925 m3/hour
|
olsted
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:35:00 -
[48]
OK this has to be a bug.
Heres some observed data which simply doesnt line up.
- After the program is submitted and happily chugging along. The extractor says its pulling 53218 units *this cycle* which is a 2 hour cycle. 53218/2 hrs = 26609unit/hr = 266.09m3/hr
- The route I am allowed to create from the "products" window is for 19765 units. Although, once selecting the destination facility (in this case my launchpad), I am allowed to specify the # of units in the route, the option lists X/19765, allowing me to only change the value of X. If I enter anything over 19765, the field resets to 19765. It is not clear from this window if this is a /hour value. I am assuming it is. 19765 route (/hr?) = 197.65m3/hr
- The link connecting the extractor to the launchpad shows a utilization of 98.825m3/hour. link size is 250m3/hr. 98.825 is not 197.65 and its not 266.09 (which it shouldnt allow anyhow).
So as far as I can tell, the routing mechanic is broken and we are all spewing extracted raw material all over the planets surface.
-O.
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:44:00 -
[49]
my current shown output cycle shows 83913 on a 4 hour run
i am showing the 17317 in the launch pad incoming routing table as well
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:58:00 -
[50]
next planet test results
5 pins taking noble metals on 15 minute cycle
18 completed cycles so far
claimed accumulated output of 198055 claimed output per hour 34341 routed amount leaving extractor 20856 routed amount entering launchpad 20856 nothing leaving launchpad yet! total in storage 188479.0 (volume 1884.79)
expected output based on claimed output *18 cycles = 618138 expected output based on routed amount * 18 cycles = 375408
missing stock from routed amount 186929 missing stock from clained output 429659
photo to follow
|
|
Yorinar
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:58:00 -
[51]
Originally by: AS LordASB
if i take the currently routed number of 17317 and take that per 4 hour cycle that would be 69268 p0 production,
in which case i have magicly made 13232 units from nothing.
I'm just pulling this out of my bum but I'm guessing 17317 is a 20-minute routing cycle. 17317 x 9 = 155853 which is close to your current cycle output of 154931 (x 9 since there were 9 20-minute cycles in the 3-hours you've had it running in the cycle in your screenshots)....
|
olsted
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:01:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Yorinar
Originally by: AS LordASB
if i take the currently routed number of 17317 and take that per 4 hour cycle that would be 69268 p0 production,
in which case i have magicly made 13232 units from nothing.
I'm just pulling this out of my bum but I'm guessing 17317 is a 20-minute routing cycle. 17317 x 9 = 155853 which is close to your current cycle output of 154931 (x 9 since there were 9 20-minute cycles in the 3-hours you've had it running in the cycle in your screenshots)....
that might work for her but it does not explain the significant difference between mats being produced, mats being routed, and *capacity used in the link*.
Something is still screwy here.
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:15:00 -
[53]
Yorinar
can you explain a little please as i dont understand your comment about 20 minute routing, given its 4 hour cycles and should route out from extractor to storage at the end of the cycle.
|
Gamingloser1
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:31:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Berikath
Originally by: Gamingloser1 Just moved the extractor to another location.....similar results. 90k estimate....less than 62k was the initial result. So thats about 1/3 drop.
First install 90k estimate 61500 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Second install 90k estimate 60297 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Third install 90k estimate 56520 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Four install 90k estimate 52242 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle. Fifth install 90k estimate 48498 actual. Canceled 1 hr cycle.
So the pattern is obvious. It seems like the units are depleted and wasted if you end up canceling a program.
I'm going to wait an hour and re-run the program to see what effects it has on extraction rates.
Is this high-sec extraction?
If so, I would guess that it might be a peculiar manifestation of the "depletion" mechanic. If there are a bunch of players all extracting from the same spot, you might be seeing the values change because stuff is being extracted in between your cycles, depleting the area and decreasing your yields.
Its low sec (.3) It seems to be the depletion mechanic. Those previous hot spots are gone. In fact the whole planet seems to be dead if you compare it to what I was getting from that planet.
|
olsted
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:50:00 -
[55]
I think hes suggesting that the routing numbers are based upon a 20 minute cycle. If this is the case, then the /hr numbers (for me) would be 59295 units/hr which far exceeds what the extractor says its pulling (53218/2 hr cycle = 26609 units/hr) and even further exceeds the link capacity as that would be 592.95m3/hr crossing my little 250m3/hr link (that says its only using 98.825m3/hr).
Now that im thinking along those lines tho...
98.825m3/hr of utilization = 9882.5units/hr of mats crossing the link. Thats nowhere near either the extractor stated cycle ammount OR the extractor to launchpad route amount crossing that link.
Something is STILL not right in Denmark.
-O.
|
Yorinar
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:51:00 -
[56]
Originally by: AS LordASB Yorinar
can you explain a little please as i dont understand your comment about 20 minute routing, given its 4 hour cycles and should route out from extractor to storage at the end of the cycle.
yeah, i don't really know and i can't confirm on my own setups until I get home in a few hours, but my guess was just that the number in the routing is based on the product that passes through every 20 minutes. If that is true, the 20-minute cycle is just some arbitrary time period CCP uses for routing.. So that routing amount x 3 = your hourly output that's getting routed from that building. Hopefully that makes more sense, the more I write, the less it makes sense to me.. :)
any other theories?
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 23:02:00 -
[57]
@ Yorinar
i can see what you are saying about this 20 minutes and as i can see you also cant make the numbers add up, something seams very wrong with all the different numbers which are being shown to the user.
if this extractor was a car, and in the advertising had stated 4 different numbers for its mpg/mpl on the same page you would woundered if the people making it knew what they where doing at the time of writing said advertising.
this is effectively what is happening, you are given so many different numbers, none of which turn out to be the real level of output, thus very frustating
(sorry for any spelling errors its late in case there are any.)
ps, i have updated my bug report to show the new info on the second planet,and full details i have posted on this as replies, also posted a linky to this post. sadly i am going to be away for a few days due to an op, but will try and check for replies from ccp from me hosiptal bed. (you never know)
if you get anymore info or evidence and dont mind posting photos or detailed numbers please do so as it might help. at least with photos other people can see my numbers of which i am working from.
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 23:04:00 -
[58]
It seems I can confirm, the only outputs that are messed up are the ones whos cycle time > 1 hour.
It seems theres a problem with the output trickle or CCPs calculations for transferring large amounts of mats at once.
|
AS LordASB
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 23:08:00 -
[59]
@ Sigras
planet setup 1 is running 4 hour cycles planet setup 2 is running 15 minute cycles
both are faulty
while i have other planets running 30 and 1 hour and 2 hour cycles i cant give clear numbers as i had stock on planet and stock in factories. these 2 planets are the only ones i can talk about from a clear fresh point of view as i reset the factories and emptyed the launchpads. i can see some errors in the numbers mind against these other cycle time scales for me personnaly.
|
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 23:19:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Pohbis on 19/01/2011 23:24:06
Originally by: olsted that might work for her but it does not explain the significant difference between mats being produced, mats being routed, and *capacity used in the link*.
Something is still screwy here.
Have you tried actually looking at your ECU program after it has run a few cycles?
I just installed a 12 hour program. Estimated output per hour 80k.
Checking the ECU program after 2 hours and the output per 15m cycle has dropped to 11k. So 44k per hour.
The resources simply deplete insanely fast, and the ECU program does not take this into account when showing you the program on initial installation... which would indicate a bug in the replenishing of the resources.
That, or CCP really thought that giving players info that changes while they are offline is indeed a good game mechanic.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |