How I would do mines:

I would make mines a large entity, a mine field that is built or deployed at a slower rate than individual mines now.  Once deployed they aren't visible to ships until they are close range and only targetable by scouts like now.  Ships take large damage going through the field in chunks but this reduces the health of the field (unrepairable, well maybe by the ships that deploy the mines).  Scouts can attack the field but cannot be harmed by the field.  I would perhaps scale the damage and health loss of the mine field based on the size/class of ship passing through.  Limit the fields per Grav well to something like 8?

I would certainly make it so frigates or Cruisers would die passing through one side to the other but a cap would take something like 33%-50% of it's hp doing so.

Represent the mine field graphically by lots of little mines that reduce as the field's health reduces (fade out?).  Explosions occur at the ships passing through but individual mines don't need to be shown as which one detonated.

One reason I would do them this way is that by making them individual mines you are further highlighting that we are playing on a 2D plane and reducing our ability to believe what is going on in the game.  It really is silly we have to go around these mines when going above or under would be way more effective.

Could you give an example of when mines have been used offensively in combat?  A ship carrying mines would customarily dump them before entering combat, basically because you wouldn't want to carry large amounts of high explosives around on deck.  I doubt this can be considered combat use?  There have been no 'mine throwers' either, unless you count depth charges, which have no permanent presence.  Often the 'offensive' use of mines would involve dropping mines off harbours, which would be similar to dropping them in an enemy gravwell, but not similar to dropping them in the middle of a battle!

It might be useful to consider that the mines used so far in live warfare have not had the ability to recognise their own ships, which would tend to restrict their role in fleet combat.

Another aspect of naval mines is that they were not only often deadly, but a crippled ship would be out of a war for a long time.  However, we have a game where repair is easy, so that mines that are set successfully cannot be counted a success unless the target is destroyed.  If the target is easily repaired the exploded mines are just a cost.  A good reason why Sins mines should be more deadly than they were in history..

The effect of banning their combat use might seem to favour Advent, as the synergy with Repulse would still exist.  When I considered this I came back to the realisation of how little the capital ship abilities were integrated into the expansions.  As the mines are supposed to exist in phase space, where Vasari are masters, it wouldn't take much imagination to replace the Subverter synergy with another one?  Perhaps ships stunned by Subverters could attract mines over greater distances, effectively turning pre-laid Vasari mines into homing mines?  The same could be true of (for example) the Marauder's ability to phase out enemy ships, the ships could then attract mines from far further away?  That would retain the need to lure the enemy into the vicinity of your mines, instead of having ships bombed by mines directly in combat, which seems wrong? 

I don't see the confusion but let me dumb it down for you.  Subverters disable everything within a certain radius.  The affected ships can't move, shoot or do anything.  This enables the mine layers to lay their mines without them being destroyed.  The only things that can destroy them is cap, SB or strike craft when this happens(something that is not disabled by the subverter).  This makes it less likely that the mines will be destroyed by what you are trying to use it on.  Assuming you have strike craft to do so, you can still destroy the mines but at a lot less risk seeing as how most firepower will be locked up with the subverter.

Now with advent, mines are strike craft so they are vulnerable even before built if left undocked.  To do as you say with advent homing mines, one has to lay mines and afterwards repulse the enemy into them.  The frigates and strike craft etc are still active and able to fire.  Now this does not matter as much assailants and other forward shooting ships unless you give them enough time to turn and shoot or some are not facing the same directions.  With flak this does not matter however because of the 360 degree firing arc and the fact that the flak can shoot them down as they are flying over to be laid.  The strike craft can still kill after they are laid but they have the benefit of being able to do it before its done as well.  This leaves a wider opportunity and more possible combatants to shoot down the mines rendering your strategy useless and less the money you spent on them.  Did I explain it well enough for you?

This is not real life and comparing real life to a game gets you nowhere.  If you use mines offensively, they are called bombs.  Mines by nature are passive and only triggered by encroachment of presumeably the enemy but pretty much anyone that comes close enough to trigger it.

If this is an attempt to bust my balls about your "strongest lrf" thread, then try again.  I am not the one that started a thread about a test and not show a replay to back yourself up and demonstrate methodology of your test.

[_]-Greyfox

What does any of this have to do with memory optimization. 

Priority one of this thread is to reduce the memory causing lag. If there was a reduction in mind then discuss balance or any other optimization that might change balance then discuss balance.

Please Read The OP

EXAMPLE: If there is a 50% reduction in mines at a grav well and the damage was doubled, would that cause a balance issue?

MINES are a type of BOMBS.  I dont argue to make all mines move and seek to destroy fleets

Lets see if I can dumb advent mine laying for you.

Guardians repulse entire fleet preventing them from attacking and cripples movement

Advent undocks mines and lays them behind fleet (dont be  dumb and fly to enemy flak or sc when deploying)

Fleet cant turn around fast enough to kill mines before the become cloaked and active

2nd Guardian repulse fleet to mines

Hey look repulse affects Capital ships too

Plus you dont have to use mines with repulse. Just lay them in front of you and hide in them. Mines can be effective against spammers early in the game

Again advent mines move as fast as SC and are the least prioritized target

Grey you dont use mines in combat. Why bother offering suggestions on fixes or modification.  I try to balance the game as a whole unlike you,who lobby for the sole race that you only play or remove any aspects of game play you dont use.

It would seem to me that you are lobbying for vasari, JJ.  Flaks as I mentioned can shoot all the way around and can kill them placed behind, side, or wherever.  Fleet doesn't need to turn around with flak and flak aren't necessarily facing all the same direction anyways.  Far be it for someone to micro their fighters to shoot down the mine squads especially if the enemy have shown a propensity to have and use them.  You don't argue to make all mines move and destroy fleets.  Vasari is already able to lay them in the middle of the enemy without any movement or retaliation due to subversion.  Mines by definition are passive.  You lay them where your enemy would go or want to go and the enemy passes over it because they don't know exactly where it is or have to move too fast to look for them.  If you are launching them at something, they are no longer mines.  They are missles or bombs.  Semantics to be sure but there is a difference.  The thing is you cannot hide them.  You can see them quite clearly when you are present in the well regardless of if there are scouts or not.  The invisible thing is not a bad idea but one would have to have them not used offensively with subversion or the like.  I am trying to avoid making a bad thing worse.  Subs and mines are already a cheap tactic.  Would you have them made worse because you prefer vasari having another tool in their overly large toolbelt?

[_]-Greyfox

"One area of concern is the memory and CPU eaten up by Space Mines. I'd like to hear some suggestions on how we can keep mines in the game without consuming so many resources"

 Good points Greyfox. I like the idea of invisible mines but how would we balance?

First off I believe if we go the invisible route TEC would have the best advantage but would also be the most balanced. They are big, time consuming to build and would likely have the largest explosive radius. Being invisible would actually be a huge benefit and would in and of itself help level the playing field.

Advent homing mines I believe could also have the invisibility but only if they are not moving. The moment they start to move they would lose their invisibility (this invisibility would likely be a research upgrade as could be a speed boost).

Vasari mines I think might be absolutely fine the way they are lain etc and likely might be the weakest of all the mines with a longer recycle on the ability. 

Thoughts and discussion on this balancing technique? I would really like to see this kind of differentiation as well as model improvement on mines.

"Would making the mines invisible so that nothing is drawn by the opposing enemies screen help with memory or will it use up the same due to the game engine having requiring to keep track of those mines?"

Yes, somewhat. Not to sure on the games engine but a few posts back made a point of each mine constantly having to calculate if an object comes close. Thats the biggest issue I would think but reducing the poly count of the model helps and if the model is not shown would help more. Again I would have to see how the game engine uses the mines.

I like boshimi's points  , TEC is a little lacking and Vasari are already good.

Maybe I'm getting confused here but weren't mines invisible in the Entrenchment beta? I remember mines causing quite some problems then.

@DesConnor: Once a model is spawned in-game it uses full resources weather it is zoomed in on or not. Thats why it hurts the 2 gig limit so much, all assets are loaded. Strike craft are also bad due to each poly on the model having to be recalculated for movement and the speed of the movement also comes into play. Stagnant models are not as bad like mines but like I said I think the mines are constantly calculating if an object is close enough so its acting like a memory leak which can be worse then a model thats constantly moving and every poly is being recalculated in space.

To reiterate, I do not believe invisible mines would be good for the game.  This represents a gambit, not a strategy, in that you're hoping the enemy doesn't reveal in the right place at the right time.  This would punish carelessness rather than poor strategy or tactics.  I quite like that Sins has a relatively low propensity for "blindsides", and feel this is the wrong direction to go.