[Rant] Did they just INCREASE the payout for deep core mining?!

OK, so take out the bit about passenger missions. Does it make any difference to what I was saying in the original post?

To me it does. It's clear ED is moving towards 'high' profit for all activities. Don't worry, combat will be next. This is a step in the right direction, IMO.
 
I had considered that it was being done deliberately, and temporarily, for reasons like these, which would be fair enough.

I'm aware that they're trying to reduce the grind, which I think is a good thing. I just think that, as things currently stand, they've gone too far in the other direction, and they haven't balanced the different activities against each other.

A few questions, this time without sarcastic jokes:
1) What is the balanced Cr/h that you think is acceptable?
2) What makes you think all activities should be equally rewarding? Why should a sight-seeing leisure liner, having non-wanted tourists on-board, be rewarded the same as high-intensity war zone fighter pilot? Why should mining low-demand water or oxygen be rewarded the same as high-demand... rhodplumsite, for example? Why should seal-clubbing over-engineered Anaconda be rewarded the same amount of Cr/h as explorer going for a 60k Ly trip? And how do you balance such unrelated activities against each other when there's no common ground between them at all? Can't you see you're creating the problem by comparing completely unrelated activities with no common grounds to one another, based solely on how much income they generate? And then you theorize they should be "balanced" against one another because... why?
 
Last edited:
A few questions, this time without sarcastic jokes:
1) What is the balanced Cr/h that you think is acceptable?
2) What makes you think all activities should be equally rewarding? Why should a sight-seeing leisure liner, having non-wanted tourists on-board, be rewarded the same as high-intensity war zone fighter pilot? Why should mining low-demand water or oxygen be rewarded the same as high-demand... rhodplumsite, for example? Why should seal-clubbing over-engineered Anaconda be rewarded the same amount of Cr/h as explorer going for a 60k Ly trip? And how do you balance such unrelated activities against each other when there's no common ground between them at all? Can't you see you're creating the problem by comparing completely unrelated activities with no common grounds to one another, based solely on how much income they generate? And then you theorize they should be "balanced" against one another because... why?

I haven't said all activities should be equally rewarding. I've said that the reward should be balanced against the risk/effort, and that the new mining payouts seem excessive. That's all.

Me having a bit of a rant about the balance being off is not me trying to install galaxy-wide video-game communism.

Like, I actually agree with what you're saying in point (2). 'Balanced against each other' doesn't mean 'They all pay the same'. Mining, which is easy and low-risk, should not be far more profitable than combat, which requires skill and is high-risk. That's what I mean by 'balance'.
 
Last edited:
Can you tell me how ? i play this game four years and mostly doing combat but 8 billion in a week from the combat sounds to me like science fiction big time.
 
I just mined my first crackable rock since the patch, and I got 18T of Mon@zite; I think the most I'd ever got before was 12 or 14T.

So they looked at mining a deep core rock and said, "Hmm, 3.5 million for 10-15 minutes' gameplay (including search time), with virtually no risk, available in pretty much any system with a ringed planet, to pretty much any ship? Nah, better make it 5 million!"

Meanwhile, 20 minutes in a high-intensity CZ barely gets you half a mill, and there are passenger missions offering not much more than that to travel 22,000LY. And the other two mining tools (aside from using the Abrasion Blaster on deep-core rocks) are less use than the mining laser.

I mean, I hate to be a Negative Nancy, but do they think a 'well-balanced game' means you can stand the disk on its side and it won't fall over?

(Still, at least they've changed 'Opal' to 'Void Opal'. Phew! I think the whole community can breathe easier knowing they've rectified that crucial issue.)
You can't mine casually. You have to outfit for mining and mining alone. A CZ is something you can pop into with basically any general-purpose build, and have a good shot at making money if you're not stupid about it. Not saying CZs shouldn't pay more or that mining shouldn't pay less (I have no opinion on that really), just that the two activities should not necessarily be equal in pure cr/hour potential.
 
I haven't said all activities should be equally rewarding. I've said that the reward should be balanced against the risk/effort, and that the new mining payouts seem excessive. That's all.

Me having a bit of a rant about the balance being off is not me trying to install galaxy-wide video-game communism.

Like, I actually agree with what you're saying in point (2). 'Balanced against each other' doesn't mean 'They all pay the same'. Mining, which is easy and low-risk, should not be far more profitable than combat, which requires skill and is high-risk. That's what I mean by 'balance'.

To an extent I agree with you, though I had my Type 10 blown up recently just because I hesitated for a second too long in dropping my cargo to a pirate. (Well, technically I didn't hesitate, the guy was just impatient and it took me tad too long in locating the correct function to drop what he wanted). Try running away or fighting back in that, when you have equipment geared towards long jump range and mining, not combat. It took'em NPCs like 20s to drop me down.

You still haven't answered my question, though. Why should be relatively easy mining less profitable than relatively more skill-demanding combat?
See, my brother's a coal miner, and his line of work is incomparably more dangerous than me sitting on my butt in the office, clicking databases. And yet I earn more.
Why is that?

And I still don't agree mining earns too much in comparison. I did my share of mining in the past few days and it wasn't until I fully grasped the new Pulse Scanner, learned how to interpret the colors, and started locating crackable asteroids with better efficiency, until I reached around 30MCr per hour. Does that sound excessive? It doesn't in my book, unless you're factoring only the Opal rush of recent, which is an extreme case scenario. But then comes a question: how is the extreme case scenario representative of mining income as a whole? It's not!

So instead of arguing with you, I would like to ask in the spirit of good intentions: how much did you earn in your mining venture and what did you mine?
This should allow me to better understand where you come from.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom