Feature Request: Mining Yield with and without crits included

[Potawto]

With the upcoming Catalyst expansion, crits are a thing. Crits create ore out of thin air so do not affect how quickly you can mine out an asteroid. There are times when this matters more than yield (Homefronts, for example), so it would be very useful to be able to see mining yield without crits factored in.

Residue is handled in an acceptable way for these purposes, but it might get messy if crit is handled the same way.

Im not sure the best way to do this, but adding a line to the hover tooltip with the info of how much of the calculated yield is from crits (similar to how residue is listed there) would be a good starting point. If there were toggle features such as "Factor in Mining Crits", "Factor in Residue" that would be perfect for my personal use.

The value I care about most of the time is Yield + Residue - Crit Yield

[DarkFenX]

For now I just included crits in averaged yield-per-second value.

Crits create ore out of thin air so do not affect how quickly you can mine out an asteroid

Tbh I did not even know that (probably because I didn't read patch notes thoroughly). I thought they just take more ore from asteroid when crit happens.

Thinking about it, I do not think people care much about waste and crits values that much, they are intermediates which are used to calculate things which are actually important. I think values should be split differently: instead of yield | waste as it shows now, and instead of yield | waste | ore taken from asteroid, it makes more sense to keep just 2 values: yield | ore taken from asteroid, or yield | mining efficiency.

So, to give a few examples:

t2 gas scoop (no crits, waste) on a prospect:

• 1.33 m3/s yield | 1.783 m3/s drain
• 1.33 m3/s yield | 74.6% efficiency

ORE ice harvester (crits, no waste) on a mack:

• 14.9 m3/s yield | 14.4 m3/s drain
• 14.9 m3/s yield | 103.5% efficiency

t2 strip miner with a-type crystals (crits, waste) on a hulk:

• 19.1 m3/s yield | 25.37 m3/s drain
• 19.1 m3/s yield | 75.3% efficiency

Obviously drain per second representation is better for your case, but efficiency might be easier to read for most people (and drain could still be put into tooltip). Also that ignores all the rounding down which happens when you mine specific ore types, so those numbers need to be taken with a grain of salt anyway.

On a side-note, do you know how crits are handled for non-integer multipliers for ice harvesters? E.g. ice harvester has 3.5x yield multiplier in case of crit, does it result in 100% 3x ice blocks, 100% 4x ice blocks, or 50% 3x / 50% 4x ice blocks spawned in your cargo?

[Potawto]

I think you are right that focusing on the final values people care about (drain from rock and ore in hold) is a good way to go about it.

My understanding is that fractional ore results in a percentage chance of getting floor or ceiling, proportional to how close between the values you are. That's what our testing on Singularity showed with fractional ore yield without counting crits. Abyssal Artifact Recovery ores are 4 m3, much bigger than most rocks, so it was quite easy to see this in practice. I expect crits to work the same way. I also expect ice to work the same way. The difference in volume of ice probably just going to make it more dramatically noticeable.

[DarkFenX]

You are probably right, it's just rounded down. Yield of 1000 m3 ends up being 3500 m3, and then regular rounding down happens which you have for most asteroid ores.

[Potawto]

It is not just rounded down, it will round up chance based. Before Catalyst it always rounded down I believe, after Catalyst you get fractional ores stochastically (is that the right word?). I expect they had to do this because of shorter cycle times causing fractional ores to become a major deal.

Below is my spreadsheet showing the math I used (Q7 is the ore volume). It lined up with what we saw on Singularity doing Abyssal Artifact Recovery. Sometimes we would get (for example) 5 ore, sometimes 6. We had pilots with Astrogeology 5 and Mining 5 (21.48%), they would much more frequently get an extra ore than our pilot with Astrogeology 2 (3.91%).

EDIT: This math is wrong D: D: fixed is below

[DarkFenX]

Alright alright, i guess I need to check patch notes. I didn't know that as well.

If yield is rounded up/down like that, then theoretical yield pretty accurately displays expected yield regardless of ore type you are going to mine.

[Potawto]

I just realized the math is all wrong in that spreadsheet, was dividing the actual chance with the ore volume for no reason.

[Potawto]

Alright alright, i guess I need to check patch notes. I didn't know that as well.

If yield is rounded up/down like that, then theoretical yield pretty accurately displays expected yield regardless of ore type you are going to mine.

Yes, the whole reason I started the spreadsheet was for breakpoints assuming it always rounded down. Then it turned out it didn't always round down, and the spreadsheet wasn't useful anymore.

[DarkFenX]

One possible issue with displaying yield and drain is mission ore. It is immune to wastage procs. Did CCP share any info if it will be immune to crit procs as well? Or maybe someone tested it?

[Potawto]

That's a good point. I don't know if they have said, but one of my friends confirmed that crits work on mission ore on Singularity (Oct 24).

[DarkFenX]

FYI i implemented it as-is. Once I know how it works with mission ore, I might add an option "mission ore" somewhere so that it shows yield/drain/efficiency specifically against mission ore.