Original post can be found here. It was in relation to armours initially, but I think it may be worth something to look at from a holistic standpoint.

 Originally Posted By: Harold
Perhaps the mining stage: mines sit on veins of minerals that become increasingly difficult to extract, causing them to eventually go dormant.
 Originally Posted By: Kim
That should be the case with all mineral types at a mine site, slow decay.

I think that mines should have finite amounts of each mineral in them as long as the world map square retains the capability of regenerating its minerals (only to an inital set maximum) at a slow rate once it is no longer being mined. Or, if the mineral content of each map square was dynamic on an extraordinarily long scale such that different mineral veins rose up to minable levels, died down beyond reach, and the like every year or ten.

It would obviously have to be "done right", and would take extensive testing to make sure it was balanced. For instance, would mines be wandering extensions such that if there were two mines next to each other on the world map they would each produce comparitively less, or is each square of the world map so large as to be a parcel of unconnected veins?

It would add a great deal of realism though, and it might be the sort of realism that is unfun if it were "done wrong" and it became a chore to upkeep your mine. I wouldn't see having to move your mine once every real life year as particularly tedious, but if you had to do so once a month it would be both unfun and expensive.

Assuming it was coded in a way that wasn't inherantly bad, could this be a boon to the mud's flavor, or is it extreneous? As it was initially presented it could be used as a tool for balancing the availibities of minerals, but my question here is not whether mines need better balance, it's if this sort of change would be welcomed by players.

Everyone is aware that there are other more pressing issues than messing with systems that already work. This isn't asking for an endorsement to bumble around blindly looking for things that ain't broke to fix. Rather, it's a question of personal preference in the mudding experience with regard to how individual players interact with their world. I play as Harold on Darkemud and program as Cerberus on Darkemudtest, and I don't feel it would be at all detrimental to my personal play experience. I do feel I would enjoy having to get multiple mine sites surveyed each year, and deciding where my next capital venture would be, but that's my personal view on the topic.

In short, I am curious as to how people assume they would react if the code were ideal and the objections were NOT based on the fact that some change had occured. To make this more clear: There is no change intended in mines, this is only a fishing expedition for projected feelings!
_________________________
Please mail your views on balance to:
cerberus@darkemud.com