Ship Mining for raw mats (not SRV) - yields and results

[Kaltern]

People expect the buggy to just act like an offroad Range Rover, and when they pelt it at full speed, turn a little bit and end up just rollin down the cliff... they blame the SRV as being 'undrivable'.

Still.. I DO concede there is precious little to DO in an SRV. Shooting rocks does get tedious, granted, and scanning the same Guardian obelisks for the 100th time also gets a bit samey.

I'm just hoping things are gong to be...expanded in the expansion...

 

[CMDR Corlas]

People expect the buggy to just act like an offroad Range Rover, and when they pelt it at full speed, turn a little bit and end up just rollin down the cliff... they blame the SRV as being 'undrivable'.

I think people generally understand that handling a lower speeds is much better, but given the distances we have to drive sometimes I don't think it's all that surprising that people want to cover it faster when the option to do so is right there. I generally limit myself to around 8m/s when need to turn accurately. I get bored driving my car at that speed, and it's not really any more exciting in-game.

If there was, say a "travel" mode where we could drive the SRV like we can now, and an "agility" mode that was slower but better for navigating around tight ruins and picking up materials, that would be a lot better.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

People expect the buggy to just act like an offroad Range Rover, and when they pelt it at full speed, turn a little bit and end up just rollin down the cliff... they blame the SRV as being 'undrivable'.

well, i would expect a few thousand years in the future, the technological benefits of electric motors and "drive by wire" controls would have been perfected.

but there are three things wrong with the SRV for me:
1. the sensibility of the steering controls does not adapt with the speed, despite something having that "drive assist" label somewhere
2. the RCS thruster built into the wheels do not push the wheels towards the planet for more traction control.
3. the onboard sound system lowers the UI sound volume the faster we drive, so we can better hear the artificial motor sounds (at least THAT got an option in the patch)

(4.) Ice planets - for some reasons the driving physics on "ice" planets was made to resemble driving on a frozen lake with a flat and slippery surface, despite not being logical at all...

grinding materials on planets uses the same random spawn system we have for USS in supercruise - its random and inkonsistent.
materials spawning via mining laser from asteroids are not so random AFAIK.
finding the same asteroid again should yield the same materials again (never tested)

 

[Stealthie]

If there was, say a "travel" mode where we could drive the SRV like we can now, and an "agility" mode that was slower but better for navigating around tight ruins and picking up materials, that would be a lot better.

Interesting idea.

Basically, it'd be like having a high/low range gearbox in a 4x4.
Bung it in low range and you can drive it up walls but you're not going anywhere fast.

Only "problem" might be that the SRV already has some pretty insane abilities so giving it a "low range" would probably require it's high-speed capabilities be reduced.


Gotta say, I've never really found driving the SRV boring though.
It does, at least, require paying a bit of attention so just trundling over the next hill or through the next ravine is enough to keep me occupied.

Last night I had a Crash Site right on the edge of a 2km deep ravine.
When I arrived, in my ship, all the containers spawned and then immediately rolled down the hill and into the ravine.
Recovering all the containers in my SRV was actually pretty epic. [up]

 

[CMDR Corlas]

Only "problem" might be that the SRV already has some pretty insane abilities so giving it a "low range" would probably require it's high-speed capabilities be reduced.

Honestly, if the "low range" just gave it a much tighter turn radius, or let it (quickly) pivot in place like a (quick) tank, I think that'd be enough.

 

[varonica]

On the topic of Mining.

Planetary surface mining - shooting rocks is that it? How about we dig down - I don't know 30 cm's - there might be something down there.

It would be an interesting mechanic, however there really isn't anything down there

I mean that in a literal sense, they certainly could create the illusion of mining, but not any mechanics that would, say, explose the subsurface because there is no subsurface, the surface we see is just a 2d layer so we would just see a drill toucing the ground and mats magically appearing in our inventory, which really would be the worst way to implement it. It would be the planetary equivelant of original asteroid mining compared to the beta mechanic of actually being able to blow rocks up and stuff.

If we are going to do mining I would like it to be proper mining, drilling and planting exlosives to blow up stuff, actual digging down to subsurface deposits etc, not the equivelant of asteroid mining 1.0. it would require a lot of work though to make it more attactive than harvesting mats from volcanic and brain tree sites, just sitting there watching a drill touching the ground and mats appearing, no.

Fair enough.

I wasn't disputing the assertion, just saying that I've never found it to be worthwhile.

I guess I've just had bad luck with them (which has led me not to bother) so, as I said, I've give them another look in 3.3, when I can find them more easily.

I suspect your issue is actually with terrain rather than anything else. In the old search method it was much more likely to find volcanic sites in canyons and in rough terrain, which can really make it look like only a few objects around, once I thought I had found just a single volcanic chimney but after a while of searching I realised there were a lot more but the ground was so mountainous they were all seperated by ridges and rocks so it looked like only a few.

Brain Tree sites, however, often appear in large flat areas because they are more likely to be found in splash craters. To get an idea of what it's actually like to collect mats from these surface features I suggest visiting a Brain Tree site and setting radar to max and driving around and through it, mats are everywhere and appear on the radar quite clearly.

 

[jacozilla]

grinding materials on planets uses the same random spawn system we have for USS in supercruise - its random and inkonsistent.
materials spawning via mining laser from asteroids are not so random AFAIK.
finding the same asteroid again should yield the same materials again (never tested)

Not sure if it is even possible to find the same asteroid much less asteroid instance again, but you are correct - type and yields are not so random from asteroid mining.

In my OP results I did 3 mining sessions, each ~90-120min over couple days, then averaged the results I posted. While the numbers of each type varied somewhat, the types I got never did.

Forgot system name as I bookmark it but close to Diaguandri, has both pristine metallic and ice ring for normal vs ice mining, good station location for nearby resupply.

Same system, same planet, same A1 inner ring - always gets the same composition of raw mats I posted, just the numbers vary a bit but not wildly. Like at G1 I might get +/- 30-40 of one but then offset by lot more of another G1 type. But by G3 it never varies by more than just handful, like 15 vs 11, or 9 vs 14, etc.

And I can count on pretty much getting the same top two of G2 and G3 mats I always get: germanium / manganese --- molybdenum and niobium.

I basically need to find 3 more systems, each yielding the two other types of the G3 mats I'm looking for.

I'll try the close to star asteroid marker for G4 tip that someone above gave. Would really, really prefer to directly ship mine G4 raws vs trade up at 6:1 or 36:1

**Edit - also note, there doesn't seem to be much difference - none that I can tell - from mining for raws in pristine metallic vs metal rich. The system I used for my OP has two rings on the pristine gas planet, A1 pristine metallic, A2 metal rich. (and a nearby ice ring planet in same system - it's my 1 stop shop for normal 3P mining, raw mats mining, and ice mining (for synth resupply as yields of P, S, C, etc are far, far higher in ice rings but really bad for anything else)

The only thing that seems to matter for mats yields is using a prospector and low vs med/high mat yield asteroids.

low yield - don't even waste your time, you can fire the asteroid till fully depleted with a prospector limpet attached and not get ONE single G1 raw chunk. Low might as well mean non-existent. Sometimes get 1-2, sometimes none, usually just 1. Totally not even worth shooting as you fly by. Worthless.

med yield - always get some, usually 4-5 raw mats of some type if using prospector to enhance yield. Forgot exact numbers without prospector but not worth it.

high yield - best kind and worth it even without prospector enhancement, but yes yields of 8+ raw mat chunks by prospect first, then blast.

I haven't tried hirez instance but the time you spend on a single fight will likely negate any yield advantage. Lot faster/easier just sitting in a non-rez ring somewhere and constantly prospect.

 

[rrobes]

I avoid mining with the SRV as much as possible.

What I have done is to self-censor, that is by limiting the number of ships in my fleet. They're all engineered, I have some engineered modules in storage and enough mats to synthesize what I need.

I will go surface mining if my stocks run low and I collect everything in sight, even if I don't need need it at the moment. I will do some trading for the lower values and will burn up some of the higher grades to balance the totals.

If the update makes surface mining more enjoyable or worthwhile, I'll give it a go.

 

[avow555]

Gold=commodity
Iron=material

Doh!

2 metals as an example of the fdev world.

 

[lecorsobreton]

As far as I'm concerned, the best mat gathering sessions I've had were on Guardian planets. What I usually did was explore the site, solve the puzzle, then go on my merry way and collect stuff and after a while, recall the ship and plotted a course to the next site. By the time I had visited them all (before fighters were introduced) I had lost of g3/g4/g5 mats.

I also mine occasionally and from what I've seen, material rich asteroids drop 4 or 5 mats and it takes 2 minutes (give or take) to mine them. The only real difference is the army of limpets collecting the stuff. I just wish we had a vacuum sort of thing.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

The only thing that seems to matter for mats yields is using a prospector and low vs med/high mat yield asteroids.

low yield - don't even waste your time, you can fire the asteroid till fully depleted with a prospector limpet attached and not get ONE single G1 raw chunk. Low might as well mean non-existent. Sometimes get 1-2, sometimes none, usually just 1. Totally not even worth shooting as you fly by. Worthless.

med yield - always get some, usually 4-5 raw mats of some type if using prospector to enhance yield. Forgot exact numbers without prospector but not worth it.

high yield - best kind and worth it even without prospector enhancement, but yes yields of 8+ raw mat chunks by prospect first, then blast.

Low roids you can get 0 to 6 material fragments, averaging just over 2
Medium roids you can get 0 to 11 material fragments, averaging about 4.5
High roids you can get 1 to 13 material fragments, averaging about 6.5

The ring type matters a lot. Metallic > Metal Rich > Rocky > Icy
(technically metal rich is better than metallic, but in practice if you filter out low roids metallic gives 10% better yields than metal rich.)

Disclaimer - This may be completely incorrect next week. FD like to move the goalposts.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

i still don't understand how surface mining allows us to "mine" outcrops with our weapons,
yet on asteroids we need a special "blaster" for it, and they don't drop materials at all.

finding the same asteroid twice is actually pretty easy -> search in belt cluster instead of planetary rings

with the new ability to blow up some of them, and night vision allowing us now to see something in a belt cluster -> there is an increased incentive to drop into those anyway.

 

[dognosh]

i still don't understand how surface mining allows us to "mine" outcrops with our weapons,
yet on asteroids we need a special "blaster" for it, and they don't drop materials at all.

finding the same asteroid twice is actually pretty easy -> search in belt cluster instead of planetary rings

with the new ability to blow up some of them, and night vision allowing us now to see something in a belt cluster -> there is an increased incentive to drop into those anyway.

And you're ok with our unfeasibly fast jumps to a system 50 LYs away?
or the fact we can carry 1000s of mats on our person?
or the nerf of the yaw axis somehow?
or why we come back after ship destruction and our crew mate doesn't? (<<<--- Actually this is bad,I do wish our hard earned crew wouldn't die )

It is a GAME, not real. They need limitations/magic or for example we would be jousting in space passing each other at closing speed of nearly 2000 m/s. That would make for boring battles

 

[CMDR Corlas]

And you're ok with our unfeasibly fast jumps to a system 50 LYs away?
or the fact we can carry 1000s of mats on our person?
or the nerf of the yaw axis somehow?
or why we come back after ship destruction and our crew mate doesn't? (<<<--- Actually this is bad,I do wish our hard earned crew wouldn't die )

It is a GAME, not real. They need limitations/magic or for example we would be jousting in space passing each other at closing speed of nearly 2000 m/s. That would make for boring battles

The issue there wasn't reality, it was internal consistency.

 

[Vithigar]

While the above looks like a good haul, the only real raws that matter are the G3. Takes so many to convert G2 to G4, especially crossing categories, it is impractical to count on them as even minor source.

6:1 for same category G3 -> G4
36:1 for cross category G3 -> G4

Not totally accurate but just swag, adding up all my G3 is 43 harvested over ~2 hours. That turns into at best ~7 G4 raws if converted on same category. But typically will need to cross category which translates to ~1 G4 raw if all crossed and ~2-3 G4 raws if just one crossed and rest converted same category.

You say it's "impractical" to count your G1 and G2 mats. Did you even bother to check the math on what they would convert to? They're over half of your haul in equivalent value to the G3 mats you picked up.

821 G1 mats = 22 G3 mats
147 G2 mats = 24 G3 mats
Total converted G3 value: 46

It's still not great, but discounting the contribution from G1 and G2 mats is just being disingenuous.

 

[jacozilla]

While the above looks like a good haul, the only real raws that matter are the G3. Takes so many to convert G2 to G4, especially crossing categories, it is impractical to count on them as even minor source.

6:1 for same category G3 -> G4
36:1 for cross category G3 -> G4

Not totally accurate but just swag, adding up all my G3 is 43 harvested over ~2 hours. That turns into at best ~7 G4 raws if converted on same category. But typically will need to cross category which translates to ~1 G4 raw if all crossed and ~2-3 G4 raws if just one crossed and rest converted same category.

You say it's "impractical" to count your G1 and G2 mats. Did you even bother to check the math on what they would convert to? They're over half of your haul in equivalent value to the G3 mats you picked up.

821 G1 mats = 22 G3 mats
147 G2 mats = 24 G3 mats
Total converted G3 value: 46

It's still not great, but discounting the contribution from G1 and G2 mats is just being disingenuous.

Did you even bother to READ my post that you quoted above? Even just the portion you snipped?

Here, I put in bold and underlined the relevant part.

My entire purpose is to get top tier G4 (no G5 for raw mats) in order to engineer. In the very snippet you quoted, I clearly state "Takes so many to convert G2 to G4, especially crossing categories, it is impractical to count on them as even minor source."

I said nothing about G2 to G3 - like most ppl that engineer, lack of G3 isn't going to affect me anywhere near as much as G4. As seen in my results, ship mining is great source for G1, good source for G2, weak source for G3, no G4 (for me, others have noted possible to get G4 but I've never got one yet) and takes so many G2 to convert to G4 that as stated, impractical to count on as even minor source.

All the G2 I got would convert to whopping total of ~(3) G4 raw mats, and that's assuming best case same-category conversion at 36:1
If cross category at 216:1 not even a single conversion.

G2: (from OP above)
60 Germanium = 1 G4 conversion, not enough to make 2 at 36:1 ; need to stockpile 4 mining trips (~8 hours) for cross category 216:1
53 zinc = 1 G4 conversion best case, zero cross category
34 manganese = just barely missed but lets round up and say 1 G4 conversion best case same category

= ~3 assuming best case same category 36:1 , -zero- assuming need to cross category

I stand by my statement - if you are like me and want to avoid SRV prospecting, then with ship mining for purposes of getting G4 raw mats, the only ones that really matter are G3 because it takes so many G2 that it is impractical to count on them as a source.

Like many ppl that engineer, G3 isn't where I'm going to be constantly running out...if all I needed was G3 then yea, ship mining would be really awesome alternative and G2 I get would be VERY viable source to convert to G3. But getting to G4? Not so much.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

The exchange rates are ridiculous. But I get so many low grade mats when mining, that I sometimes convert them to g4 just to clear some space.

Plus I've always got some spare selenium to trade for the hard ones, like antimony (no spellchecker, not allimony, bad spellchecker).

 

[jacozilla]

The exchange rates are ridiculous. But I get so many low grade mats when mining, that I sometimes convert them to g4 just to clear some space.

Plus I've always got some spare selenium to trade for the hard ones, like antimony (no spellchecker, not allimony, bad spellchecker).

The one good thing of so many G1 raws is I've been using mine mostly for reload synthesis spam. Most my armed ships run at least some partial MC or all MC setup so I just try and use up my G1 synth mats fast as I can.

The rest I convert to G2/G3 at steep conversion loss, but at least make some use out of it because I've been away from game awhile and almost entire fleet is still legacy mods. Didn't get to G5 except on couple main ships so most my legacy mods are G3. Been using my mining G3 mats to convert legacy to 3.0 G2, then roll upgrade to 3.0 G3.

As noted, I'm hurting for G4 raw mats so will be awhile till I can get my 10 ship fleet to all G5.

*except manufactured and data - I can max out my mat storage for EFCs, bioconductors, and MEFs in ~2 long sessions of passenger mission rewards farming.

Going to wait for 3.3 mining and see if that helps, status quo, or hopefully not worse than current ship mining yields.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Going to wait for 3.3 mining and see if that helps, status quo, or hopefully not worse than current ship mining yields.

If nothing changes from the Beta, at least you will be able to find rings with good amounts of selenium.

My local pristine metallic, HIP 25759, planet ABC5, ring A, has a fair amount of selenium in it. Though it is on the edge of the bubble, so may be a tad out of your way.

 

[Ozram]

If nothing changes from the Beta, at least you will be able to find rings with good amounts of selenium.

My local pristine metallic, HIP 25759, planet ABC5, ring A, has a fair amount of selenium in it. Though it is on the edge of the bubble, so may be a tad out of your way.

I didn’t know that was a thing.