Resource Probe X4 3.30 - Explained.

[cjelliott]

I just thought I'd chime in with my experiences of Resource Probes in 3.30

On the whole I think they are quite useful, you can with some effort heard your miners to operate at decent local yields rather than wander the map too far. I've found that it is useful to combine Resource Probes with Black Lists based upon 'Sector Activities' to get more control over where I want them to operate.

For example, I have most of my industry based in Nopileos Fortune VI, but my miners seemed to obsess with visiting GEIII and GEIV when there were adequate resources much closer at hand. So I placed probes at several closer locations in GEI and NFII (only 1 jump) and created a new Black List called "Ore/Silicon Mining" (not a "default" black list, this will only be selected for specific ore/silicon miner ships). This black list prevents 'Sector Activities' taking place in all systems except the ones that I want them to work in - in my case i deselected GEI and NFII. They now visit the highest yield probes in those 2 sectors only.

However this doesn't seem to work for ICE mining in my game. I have the exact same set up described above for Ice resources but the miners completely ignore huge yield ice probes in GEI and instead visit much lower Ice probes in NFII. I'm still mucking about with this to try and get it working.

One thing I really dont like with the latest changes in 3.30 is the automatic Service Missions created for every mining ship - the way this is implemented is either bugged or badly thought out. I have about 8 outstanding Service Missions to find an Ice Yield of 0.64 in Nopileos Fortune II. I have spent hours searching there and can't find anything higher than 0.44 - i've placed hundreds of probes and even tried manually prospecting (this was a waste of time as what you 'see' bears no resemblence to what's in the game map). Even black listing the sector does not prevent these annoying Service Missions for Ice in NFII. What's even more annoying is that there are huge Ice yields in GEI that they completely ignore even though they are the same distance away.

[GCU Grey Area]

Surprised you are not running into depletion issues. I have some node that get so mined they are 0.3 resources down and this is in a high density (faster replenishment) area.

Surprised me too. Given the generally low yields in that sector was anticipating I'd need to deploy a lot more probes to thoroughly blanket the sector. However turned out that initial ring was sufficient for the replenish rate to balance the station's demand. Not a small station either, it's this one:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4myb2y397821 ... 1.jpg?dl=0
Includes 12 Silicon Wafer & 18 Refined Metal modules; total potential demand with them all in operation is around 57k/hr silicon & 103k/hr ore. Although in practice most of the time it's generally around half that, spiking up whenever the station's made big sales of wares further up the chain & needs to bring more low level production modules online to replenish stocks.

[CBJ]

Why you Egosoft people keep forgetting (intentionally?) that a player starts small.

I just need to point out here that Imperial Good is a volunteer moderator; a player, just like you, who has volunteered to help keep the forum under control.

[leoriq]

Seriously Imperial? In the long term you are right but what about the start? Why you Egosoft people keep forgetting (intentionally?) that a player starts small. Nothing wrong with that, but if he can not, IN A REASONABLE TIME (Less than 6h ingame), get to a point that a reasonable money source (something like 1M per hour) exists, he'll probably quit the game in all (giving bad publicity btw).

Are those numbers experimental data or are they just estimates?
If the former, how many players have you actually tested to get them?
If the latter, what basis is under them? Your assumptions?

There are games with learning curve, and there are games without. The former is X Series, the latter is Candy Crush Saga. Guess which one makes more money for devs? I don't want to play Candy Crush Saga. But the choice, as they say, is yours.

[dtpsprt]

Why you Egosoft people keep forgetting (intentionally?) that a player starts small.

I just need to point out here that Imperial Good is a volunteer moderator; a player, just like you, who has volunteered to help keep the forum under control.

I understand that... have been a Moderator (unpaid) for sites (Geocities - elected by the chat members - and Chatropolis) in the beginning of Internet in worse conditions (chat sites, we were taking turns). Nevertheless being a Moderator does connect the person with the owner of the site.
Secondly I was not referring only to Imperial Good for this issue, unfortunately, "you" in English is exactly the same in singular and plural.

[dtpsprt]

Are those numbers experimental data or are they just estimates?
If the former, how many players have you actually tested to get them?
If the latter, what basis is under them? Your assumptions?

There are games with learning curve, and there are games without. The former is X Series, the latter is Candy Crush Saga. Guess which one makes more money for devs? I don't want to play Candy Crush Saga. But the choice, as they say, is yours.

They are experimental data, it's difficult for us now with over 1500 hours ingame to remember how we started as rookies. Many of us (me included) are passionate with X Universe, so we tried and we tried until we found the way (the only way unfortunately, which is another setback).

From what I've read (especially in the Steam Forum) in the beginning (v1.20) it was too easy for people to get millions mining crystals, then the way was paved more or less (minus the bugs). At that time I was gathering the money to buy a new computer that could play the game, so I joined, eventually in v2.60 that this option started whining out.

My "early" saves (early as an X4 player that believed what Egosoft said about X4 being the continue of the X series) are "abysmal" and it was in 2.60 mind you (payouts of missions 4 time higher than now and "fast" progress of piloting skills). I am accustomed to X games having a very steep curve, so I kept trying...

My concern is what about the new players? The game NEEDS to welcome them in, if not for any other reason than that I was 29 when I started with XBTF and now I am 61!!! Will I be able to play X5? X6 is most probably in the realm of imagination for me...

[leoriq]

Are those numbers experimental data or are they just estimates?
If the former, how many players have you actually tested to get them?
If the latter, what basis is under them? Your assumptions?

There are games with learning curve, and there are games without. The former is X Series, the latter is Candy Crush Saga. Guess which one makes more money for devs? I don't want to play Candy Crush Saga. But the choice, as they say, is yours.

They are experimental data,

It's nice that you decide to dodge the second question. Let me elaborate.

What's the size of your experimental sample? Why do you consider it being representative? How many players you have observed, what % of them did quit the game "Less than 6h ingame", what % of them did quit the game in totl, what's the spread of playtime until quit vs time?
What % of those players had less that "1M per hour" money source, what's the spread playtime until quit vs money?

Until you answer those questions, what you are saying isn't experimental data, but just your assumptions.

if not for any other reason than that I was 29 when I started with XBTF and now I am 61!!! Will I be able to play X5? X6 is most probably in the realm of imagination for me...

Can I borrow your time machine? 61-29 = 32 years, but XBTF is just 20 years old.
Also, I don't see how it relates to new players and learning curve.

[jlehtone]

Can I borrow your time machine? 61-29 = 32 years, but XBTF is just 20 years old.

Wikipedia claims: "Xbft release: EU July 1, 1999; NA February 1, 2000", so depending location already 21 years, but still clearly shy of 32.
Egosoft GmbH: "Founded 1988; 32 years ago"

However, it is surprisingly easy to forget when something did happen, even if it were relatively significant.
(Or perhaps I have a "condition" that "most people" don't. Have had it all my life.)

[dtpsprt]

Are those numbers experimental data or are they just estimates?
If the former, how many players have you actually tested to get them?
If the latter, what basis is under them? Your assumptions?

There are games with learning curve, and there are games without. The former is X Series, the latter is Candy Crush Saga. Guess which one makes more money for devs? I don't want to play Candy Crush Saga. But the choice, as they say, is yours.

They are experimental data,

It's nice that you decide to dodge the second question. Let me elaborate.

What's the size of your experimental sample? Why do you consider it being representative? How many players you have observed, what % of them did quit the game "Less than 6h ingame", what % of them did quit the game in totl, what's the spread of playtime until quit vs time?
What % of those players had less that "1M per hour" money source, what's the spread playtime until quit vs money?

Until you answer those questions, what you are saying isn't experimental data, but just your assumptions.

if not for any other reason than that I was 29 when I started with XBTF and now I am 61!!! Will I be able to play X5? X6 is most probably in the realm of imagination for me...

Can I borrow your time machine? 61-29 = 32 years, but XBTF is just 20 years old.
Also, I don't see how it relates to new players and learning curve.

You can get the sample if you (s)troll the Steam Forums, where there are actually new players and they post their overviews. Most of them don't even know the existence of the Egosoft Forum and they post the bugs they run in, then wonder why there is no response, no fix.

I stand corrected (put it in Dementia if you want) about the time period, of course it is 21 years which makes me 40 when I started playing the game (checked my passport just in case... I am 61). Still this mistake doesn't answermy question about X5 (will I be alive and in condition to play it when it comes out? The young [new] ones will surely be.)

[leoriq]

They are experimental data,

It's nice that you decide to dodge the second question. Let me elaborate.

What's the size of your experimental sample? Why do you consider it being representative? How many players you have observed, what % of them did quit the game "Less than 6h ingame", what % of them did quit the game in totl, what's the spread of playtime until quit vs time?
What % of those players had less that "1M per hour" money source, what's the spread playtime until quit vs money?

Until you answer those questions, what you are saying isn't experimental data, but just your assumptions.

if not for any other reason than that I was 29 when I started with XBTF and now I am 61!!! Will I be able to play X5? X6 is most probably in the realm of imagination for me...

Can I borrow your time machine? 61-29 = 32 years, but XBTF is just 20 years old.
Also, I don't see how it relates to new players and learning curve.

You can get the sample if you (s)troll the Steam Forums, where there are actually new players and they post their overviews. Most of them don't even know the existence of the Egosoft Forum and they post the bugs they run in, then wonder why there is no response, no fix.

I stand corrected (put it in Dementia if you want) about the time period, of course it is 21 years which makes me 40 when I started playing the game (checked my passport just in case... I am 61). Still this mistake doesn't answermy question about X5 (will I be alive and in condition to play it when it comes out? The young [new] ones will surely be.)

As I said, until you provide the math, it's your personal assumption, not experimental data. It's fine to have assumptions, I have some too, but please don't show them as experimental data - they are not.

I still don't understand what learning curve has to do with release date of X5.

[BigBANGtheory]

Your miners will do their jobs without them. They just give you the possibility to deploy them in resource rich areas and some control where your miners go.

That is my understanding also, its an enhancement for auto-miners and mining with a reward for the player that takes time to use resource probes outside missions i.e. higher yields and increased operations.

I think its a good idea cos there is a tendency to look at sectors simply by the factories and resources inside them where as now you have more of a reason to explore and spend time flying around a sector with some benefits.

[jlehtone]

a player starts small. Nothing wrong with that, but if he can not, IN A REASONABLE TIME (Less than 6h ingame), get to a point that a reasonable money source (something like 1M per hour) exists, he'll probably quit the game in all (giving bad publicity btw).

There are two groups of players.

• Group A has played some earlier "X Game". They (should) know what to expect. They probably like it too, more than average Joe. Some like the "small" so much that they restart frequently. They have climbed the learning curve, perhaps years ago. They do have experience-based expectations too.
• Group B start now. Their expectations could be anything. All of them are not likely to like this niche.
• Group C has not heard of these games. Will they, ever? If they do, whose reviews will they read?

What is "reasonable time"? Trying to remember back the start of X2 (when I was in group B), I don't think I did look at the clock. The game was from hardware bundle, so I did not know nor "want" it. Did not check any publicity. I did search whether any patches had been released for it, just like I used to do with every application. Some were. Eventually, I did stumble on these Fora. Worst mistake.

Credits seem cheap and fast in X4, but that might be due to contrast to X2. I really have no idea how a freshman would see them.

What is a money source? I have one Mercury auto-trader and two auto-miners (Courier and Alligator). Is that my money source?
The game clock says about 140 ingame hours, but I can't fathom how I have spent that much time.
Assets total around 150 mil, so I my "source" has yielded about that 1 mil/hour figure of yours. No wonder I'm happy.


However, none of this relates to Resource Probes. Probes have only two aspects:

• How to deploy them?
• What effect does a deployed probe have?

Before 3.30 they had almost no effect. Now they have some. A purpose.

The "deploy" part has not changed. It does not differentiate new players from series veterans.

[Raevyan]

The problem that’s left with the new use of resource probes is really bad ui design. I mean, they give the player a visual indication where to mine (fields on map or physical asteroids) and yet just because you are in the middle of asteroids with tons of ores to mine your probe might just display 0 density... makes no sense. If you give the player visual indication then it should reflect that in the numbers, because otherwise it’s useless.