I get it now! Core mining is the new "Free Anaconda at Hutton"!

[Kayvan]

I tried Core mining last year before the mining nerf hit, and had the same experience as the OP. Spent an hour scanning for cores in a double hotspot before I finally found a single one, and then when I cracked it it was brommelite. I tried once more another time with similar results.

So I said screw DCM, refitted for surface mining and got excellent results with painite. When the nerf hit, I had enough money to never bother with it again.

 

[pnellesen]

The worst part, core mining is actually really really fun, but its super luck based to the point that its not worth it, and it just does not pay off.

It wasn't always this way. A shame they had to "fix" it.

 

[Gauntlet]

Having a Fleet Carrier has changed my approach to mining significantly. I no longer only seek out 1 mineral type when mining, instead I'm happy to fill up on a variety of reasonably well paying minerals, metals and tritium; will visit rocky, metallic or icy with much more fluidity. My miner of choice is a Python fitted for everything so whilst I'll tend to be hunting for cores, I enjoy the distraction and change of pace offered with SSD, SD and laser mining. I also fly FA off so the different mining techniques also serve to practise flying and tethering exercises

 

[scadh]

This is PLANNED not a mistake...

Sorry, I wasn't implying the game was broken or that FDev in any way miscommunicated. And I was in the right location to mine cores for my chosen commodity. My issue is with folks in the Community who claim superhuman feats of core mining that seem impossible to me (a novice core miner).

Mapped laser mining can fill 512 ton cutter in <30 mins

Nonsense! It would take the collector limpets a half hour to load 512 tons even if they were all floating right beneath the ship, let alone having to fly between rocks and laser them. No offense intended and with all due respect, friend, this is precisely the sort of hyperbole that I'm talking about!

Beyond that, I have a hard time understanding why anyone gets enjoyment from a mapped run. I like to play the game. I'm not above gaming a mechanic within the spirit of the rules (I made billions laser mining LTDs when they were vastly overpriced), but I will never abuse a game system by doing a mapped run. And I'll never log to re-spawn a mats harvest. And I never did the SLF SSD hack. To each their own, I guess.

 

[GraphiteGB]

@scadh
Mapped mining is over 1000 Tons per hour in the ring and thats the SLOW ones... the cutter size limits players to a single 512 run plus 10 in refinery...
Players who are not getting distracted can get to there carrier and back <30 mins...

This user did not even do it correctly as they are collecting Non mining items as well...

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Core mining is real. Huconda isn't.

 

[scadh]

@scadh
Mapped mining is over 1000 Tons per hour in the ring and thats the SLOW ones... the cutter size limits players to a single 512 run plus 10 in refinery...
Players who are not getting distracted can get to there carrier and back <30 mins...

This user did not even do it correctly as they are collecting Non mining items as well...

I'm sorry, I just don't believe you and the graph does not necessarily support your conclusion. I can't find any videos on YouTube that show anyone getting anywhere close to the numbers you're claiming, even when doing silly stuff to save time like ramming asteroids full-speed to stop. DTE Astronomy shows ~650 tons/hr. A speed run guy fills 512 + 10 in 40 minutes, but not carrier-to-carrier. Don't get me wrong, those numbers are still beyond absurd and way, way better than I do in my Python. But 1,000 tons/hr is not feasible and, to be honest, a mapped mining speed run doesn't look like any fun at all to me.

The graph is interesting, though. I've never even considered calculating credits per hour for mining or any other activity (I prefer to judge entertainment per hour!), but am curious how that is generated? Also (serious question, not being argumentative), can you explain to me how that user prospected 21 asteroids w/ 22 prospector limpets if on 4 occasions they prospected the same asteroid more than once? That math doesn't make sense to me.

 

[GraphiteGB]

I'm sorry, I just don't believe you and the graph does not necessarily support your conclusion. I can't find any videos on YouTube that show anyone getting anywhere close to the numbers you're claiming, even when doing silly stuff to save time like ramming asteroids full-speed to stop. DTE Astronomy shows ~650 tons/hr. A speed run guy fills 512 + 10 in 40 minutes, but not carrier-to-carrier. Don't get me wrong, those numbers are still beyond absurd and way, way better than I do in my Python. But 1,000 tons/hr is not feasible and, to be honest, a mapped mining speed run doesn't look like any fun at all to me.

The graph is interesting, though. I've never even considered calculating credits per hour for mining or any other activity (I prefer to judge entertainment per hour!), but am curious how that is generated? Also (serious question, not being argumentative), can you explain to me how that user prospected 21 asteroids w/ 22 prospector limpets if on 4 occasions they prospected the same asteroid more than once? That math doesn't make sense to me.

Any body can get the graphs if they set up the web sites as fdev Compainion API allows Mining data extracted from Fdev server... If users login.... cAPI exports the mining data..
Only one person even bothered to create a site focused on mining and that site is online...

Mining Analyzer

fankserver.gitlab.io

Mine. login and wait for the CAPI to transfer the data from journals on fdev server and the chart spits out the data from the journals logs...
If you dont want people raiding the location if your core mining just remove the system name...