Developer Notes 13 - Loot-2.0 Statistics

[SKULL777]

5%~ average for MA sounds a bit too high in my opinion, expected 2-3%, would be more fair counting actual average MU value of loot and the amount of PED one player can cicle in one day, otherwise in my case "mid level" player, paying 30$ ~ per day sounds not very affordable.

So true but if MA is going this route better give more MU back then or else why bother ?

 

[Carn]

Why the hell should the player who cyclses 100k PED a month get more %return than the player who cycles 100PED a month?
So you say the more you cycle, the more return you should get?
Sure i ask my bank for 50.000€ and craft EP IV nonstop. How much PED cycled would that be? Now if i am following your logic, i should surely get more return than the player who cycles 5€ with EP I?
Thats crafting, i know, but its still the same logic you use with hunting.
Who forces you to cycle 100k PED a month?
Is there any statement that you get better returns the more you cycle? Everybody should have the same chance to make profit, the 100k PED Uber and also the 10PED low noob.

You risk more so you can win/lose more. You don't risk much, you can't win/lose much.
That makes sense to me and not "You risk more so you should get guaranteed profit".

 

[SnowLeopard]

I'd like to know the numbers for the period between "loot 2.0" and the start of migration, and the period from start of migration until now.
From graphs based on EL data, global trends did not change much with intro of Loot 2.0, but shot up drastically since the migration started.

 

[Immortal]

Why the hell should the player who cyclses 100k PED a month get more %return than the player who cycles 100PED a month?
So you say the more you cycle, the more return you should get?
Sure i ask my bank for 50.000€ and craft EP IV nonstop. How much PED cycled would that be? Now if i am following your logic, i should surely get more return than the player who cycles 5€ with EP I?
Thats crafting, i know, but its still the same logic you use with hunting.
Who forces you to cycle 100k PED a month?
Is there any statement that you get better returns the more you cycle? Everybody should have the same chance to make profit, the 100k PED Uber and also the 10PED low noob.

You risk more so you can win/lose more. You don't risk much, you can't win/lose much.
That makes sense to me and not "You risk more so you should get guaranteed profit".

The player cycling 100kped is an uber with the best guns.

That's why.

 

[Carn]

The player cycling 100kped is an uber with the best guns.

That's why.

Well you got a point there but isnt there also a "best gun" for low lvl punies? Then return should also be as good as Ubers hunting high lvl :b

 

[Xen]

Well you got a point there but isnt there also a "best gun" for low lvl punies? Then return should also be as good as Ubers hunting high lvl :b

There is no good gun for punies, stop hunting punies. I wouldn't hunt anything under 50 health.

 

[San]

Thank you for publishing some numbers. Will there be periodic updates?

Why the hell should the player who cyclses 100k PED a month get more %return than the player who cycles 100PED a month?

I reckon that this is the bracket with most of the expensive tools that get you close to or even above break-even. It would be interesting to know how many players this actually represents, should be possible to estimate by gleaning from Entropialife data (using a factor to extrapolate total loot from the proportion of captured globals). It is typical for many MMOs to have a relatively small number of "whales" (as they're called in the industry's jargon).

 

[Atrax]

holy crap who decided to post this?

!?!?!?

Guys I think maybe there's aliens taking over MA HQ.

Seriously, I see that many people would like more data to build a fuller picture but holy cow, thank you for providing any such insight at all!

 

[carle]

Thank you for publishing some numbers. Will there be periodic updates?


I reckon that this is the bracket with most of the expensive tools that get you close to or even above break-even. It would be interesting to know how many players this actually represents, should be possible to estimate by gleaning from Entropialife data (using a factor to extrapolate total loot from the proportion of captured globals). It is typical for many MMOs to have a relatively small number of "whales" (as they're called in the industry's jargon).

You can look at tracker
I must have over 50% in globals to make a run, but im super efficient so someone else is maybe at 55% so look at people with over 60k in globals for a month and you will see approx numbers.

Edit iam abit drunken but in board numbers its 50%

 

[Ime]

Why the hell should the player who cyclses 100k PED a month get more %return than the player who cycles 100PED a month?

The people who plays the most also decays the most. And now from 2.0 if you're not getting "rewarded" for playing more you'll just pay more. If there's no reward people will play less resulting in less income for MA.

 

[DoA]

• Net return for all hunting activity since VU 15.15: 94.71%
• Net return for hunters cycling at least 100,000 PED since VU 15.15: 97.29%

These return rates are very close to MindArk’s targets for Loot 2.0, and indicate that the changes implemented are working as intended. Of course, we will continue to monitor, tweak and improve moving forward.

I find it normal for hunters cycling a large amount of money to get better returns for the simple reason that they probably have better skills (and I talk here about defensive skills so less defensive costas) and better gear (as in I doubt there are many people cycling 100,000+ PEDs without a 3.0+ or even 3.2+ DPP). It doesn't mean they are favorized in any way for volume grinding, just that they are more efficient than the rest of us.

Also I kept talking about MU and you may deny it all day long, but while on loot 1.0 most of the loot was TT food (either we were talking about ammo or oils that never sold), nowadays the base MU is 101% for shrapnel (presuming reusing it) and the MU for all over items is going higher because the supply is getting lower and the demand for crafting weapons is getting higher (since not so many (L) ones drop from loot anymore).

But now, tell me who was right all along? I said over and over again that I imagine that the mean value should be around 95% and that the top of the interval should be somewhere around 98%, allowing to break even via MU, which is almost spot on what the actual returns are (less than 1% difference for both value) and which MA says are very close to what they aimed for.

For example:

I am yet to see anyone with at least a somehow statistically significant sample, coming with a log showing less than 90% return rates; most of the logs I saw reported results between 92% and 98% (95% being the exact average between 92% and 98%), which are exactly where I think they should be.

So, still yelling that I'm wrong all over and that I should shut up because I don't know what I'm talking about? Because to me it looks like I had a very good and clear vision over how things are working and that everything is indeed working as intended.

Also really glad seeing that MA is not basing their decisions on some anecdotal forum feedback, but instead on solid numbers, from across the board, derived from their database.

WELL DONE, MA!

 

[Haruto Rat]

Markup will slowly grow with current droprate. There are still too many guns that dropped pre 2.0 that are still for sale now, give it some time ..

People said the same when shrap was introduced. There indeed was a boost for stackables but pretty short-lived; why would it be different this time?

As for guns... welcome to Armatrix Matrix with blueprint drop rate like this it's only a matter of time before lower guns settle about 110%. Higher ones might keep MU for a while though.

But ultimately. MU can't be conjured out of thin air just by throttling supply, it takes an expanding universe to maintain MU in the long run.

 

[Ferial]

Also really glad seeing that MA is not basing their decisions on some anecdotal forum feedback, but instead on solid numbers, from across the board, derived from their database.

WELL DONE, MA!

Ehm. Their average really doesn´t mean anything to anyone at all. There could be one happy camper out there making 160% returns, paid by people like me with with 81,5% returns post 2.0. Granted i´ve only cycled about 40k since 2.0 it still hurts a bit, especially after being able to sustain ~97,5% pre 2.0 and virtually playing for free.

If this brings down the cost to play for the majority it´s all good though, I´ll just downscale to a level where I can afford to lose 20% of my cost to play each month

 

[DoA]

Ehm. Their average really doesn´t mean anything to anyone at all. There could be one happy camper out there making 160% returns, paid by people like me with 81,5% returns post 2.0.

Sure, I understand what you're saying and indeed if you would be morbidly obese and I would be starving and ready to die by malnutrition, on average both of us would be "well fed and at the right weight", still we'll both have all chances to be dead before the study results get published.

Still, the fact that they're actually tracking all these numbers and for various categories of players is, IMHO, a great sign and I'm quite sure they don't stop their analyzes here but they also look at other numbers like mean, median, distribution curves, etc. Anyway, I definitely like what I'm seeing for now (both the raw numbers and the transparency from MA) and the numbers totally align with what I have envisioned all the time.

 

[Alina]

Sure, I understand what you're saying and indeed if you would be morbidly obese and I would be starving and ready to die by malnutrition, on average both of us would be "well fed and at the right weight", still we'll both have all chances to be dead before the study results get published.

Still, the fact that they're actually tracking all these numbers and for various categories of players is, IMHO, a great sign and I'm quite sure they don't stop their analyzes here but they also look at other numbers like mean, median, distribution curves, etc. Anyway, I definitely like what I'm seeing for now (both the raw numbers and the transparency from MA) and the numbers totally align with what I have envisioned all the time.

u talk so much and u are full of experince "dude"

Favorite Mob: Oratan Prospector
Highest Loot: 65 PED
Total Loot: 305 PED

GTFO

 

[Stefan 008 Bond]

When I reflect on it a little more, it really does seem that the happiest days throughout Entropia's history was when there was stackable mu% for all. The time period where hunters camped argos for Iron and drones for gazz etc. I think the psychology of gamers being able to contribute to the economy, as in, at least some of their loot was in demand might have had a far greater effect than just helping returns... just a thought

 

[Haruto Rat]

When I reflect on it a little more, it really does seem that the happiest days throughout Entropia's history was when there was stackable mu% for all. The time period where hunters camped argos for Iron and drones for gazz etc. I think the psychology of gamers being able to contribute to the economy, as in, at least some of their loot was in demand might have had a far greater effect than just helping returns... just a thought

That was the time of an expanding universe. When there are lots of people 'buying in', there is more MU, too.

Although you can still farm argos for iron. Sometimes it seems they drop more of it when MU is higher - it's as if the system has a sales plan, and if FOMA miners don't dig up enough iron, it's being stuffed into argos.

 

[Antrace]

...

I am yet to see anyone with at least a somehow statistically significant sample, coming with a log showing less than 90% return rates; most of the logs I saw reported results between 92% and 98% (95% being the exact average between 92% and 98%), which are exactly where I think they should be.

It is wrong, u can't make the arithmetic mean, you should computes a weighted average..


I hope MA can make math calc better or the game will go bankrupt. I hope that all mid-lvl players are cycling more than the summ of all higend players that will quit or slow down.

i don't have these numbers, so cant say anything more.

 

[Haruto Rat]

Still, the fact that they're actually tracking all these numbers and for various categories of players is, IMHO, a great sign [...]

This actually means they're tracking numbers for every single player - for the simple reason that, at the start of the period, it's impossible to know which category the avatar will fall into at the end.

 

[Stefan 008 Bond]

That was the time of an expanding universe. When there are lots of people 'buying in', there is more MU, too.

Although you can still farm argos for iron. Sometimes it seems they drop more of it when MU is higher - it's as if the system has a sales plan, and if FOMA miners don't dig up enough iron, it's being stuffed into argos.

I respectfully disagree.. that was a time when crafters chased ATH and globals on things other than Explosives, a time when UL gear (well weapons at least) was exceedingly rare and gear crafters and mu% hunters had a place in the economy. I am not of the feeling that the mu% days of old were because of the expanding player base (it never really got that big at any point in history unfortunately... yet!)

 

[Antrace]

MA saying:

Average return for all hunting activity since VU 15.15: 94.71%

A) 100.000 peds players has 97.29% > 94.71 %
B) 10.000 peds players got 94.79 % > 94.71 %
C) accounts created in 2017, cycling at least 100 PED since VU 15.15: 94.87% >94.71%

Net return for accounts created in 2017: 93.47% <94.71 <----- how many are these hunters? are they cycling more than type A) B and C)?



i look these stats and i'm thinking something is wrong

edit: something is wrong, or something big missed

 

[Evey]

NANANANAN n00000Bz I told you sooooo MA agrees with me not UUUU
nananMENSAnananan

Yes, you did say 95% should be something somewhere. Which is pretty close to what MA has in mind...

This, however, does not mean you understand ANY of the numbers you type or read on this forums or see in EntropiaLife.

Let me give you some numbers that are put into perspective:

Top 3 hunters cycle 5-600k PED a month in TT. 98% (at best) for each means a 12k PED loss (minimum). They will most likely not get it all back in MU because a lot of PED goes into enhancers (that is another 15-20k ped a month).

Looking at this example, where top 3 players with the best maxed gear, tons of skills and the most time on their hands hope to end a month with -5/+5k PED, is not something worth looking up to, skilling up to, gearing up to.

If this game is not worth grinding, hunting, with all the MU you will get (not you, you're not getting anything because you're not doing anything, you're just talking bullshit politics all day without understanding how weapons work) cannot hope to go on for long because it will not be able to cover all costs if, starting with the top 3, 5,-20 players, will dimm their hunting to 10% or even 0%.
You should follow Alina's advice...

 

[DoA]

It is wrong, u can't make the arithmetic mean, you should computes a weighted average..

It was just about predicting that MA needs a share about 5%, so the return rate across the universe should be at about 95%.

Then I just took into account that they said that loot returns are mostly dependent on loot input, and weapon efficiency has a 7% influence on loot returns, which I translated into something like this:

Imagine something like (obviously oversimplified): loot_return = kill_costs * (92.5 + efficiency/10)%, resuling in 92.5% return rate at 0% efficiency and 99.5% return rate at 100% efficiency.

So just applied a +/- 3.5% to the 95%, resulting the 91-92% to 98-99%; obviously, I never said distribution was linear; most likely there are a lot of players (with relative low cycling values) on the lower part of the spectrum and just a few whales (not saying in a bad way) with high efficiency and lots of spendings on the top of the spectrum.

Then, with almost every single log I had access to (either being posted on forums or got it from people I know in game) they kinda followed in this model: almost everyone was about 91-92% and below 98-99%; the highly efficient people were above 95%, the less efficient players below 95%; the people that used to get better than 99% return rates saw a drop, the people that used to get lower than 91% returns saw an increase.

Now MA comes and publish the very same numbers: ~95% for general average and ~98% for the top players (sure, they didn't said top players, they just said big grinders, but I guess we agree that the people cycling 100,000k+ PEDs in less than a month are generally exactly the top players), which is exactly where I placed them in my model. They not only publish these numbers, but they also say that they are very close to where they expected them to be (so working as intended).

So yeah, I think I can safely say that my vision about what MA tries to achieve was spot on and that my suppositions were (almost entirely) confirmed by the numbers provided by MA. If you still don't see it or if you (not you in this case) continue to say that all I say is wrong because I don't have the budget to hunt myself and only theorize, even after all my "philosophical theories" proved right, I can't help it.

Anyway, since all I (afford to) do is swunting (and enjoying), I don't really care about what happens with hunting; as long as they give me 50%+ return rates (and that is something I can swear will always happen) so I can cover the loses from the sweat price I'm all good. For me, all these loot 2.0 theorizings were representing just an intellectual exercise and all the posting on forums in this period represented sheer enjoyment (caused mainly by a lack of debate club in my school/town), which probably somehow borderlines with trolling - lol. Anyway, I'm really happy to see my numbers confirmed and (at least in my vision) won the debate argumentation. For now (probably 'till I'll get bored again in a few days)... DoA over'n'out.

 

[DoA]

pure ad-hominem attacks + GTFO

Yes, you did say 95% should be something somewhere. Which is pretty close to what MA has in mind...

followed by pure ad-hominem attacks and explanations why you can't control your addiction and can't limit your expenses both in time and money to reasonable numbers

Thought you both said you'll ignore me? What happened with your promise?

Anyway, as long as I came to the same numbers that MA published, while you didn't, it looks like I do understand some things, at least more than you do, isn't it?

And, anyway, as I repeated over and over again... posting on forums is an entertainment for me... I do it because I like it, not because you like it or not... so I will stop only when it will no longer be entertaining for me...

Still you can:
- report me if you think I brake any forum rules
- ignore me if you don't want to waste your time reading my blabbering
- keep cry over it
- drop this attitude and actually admit that you always can learn something from smarter (even not necessarily more experienced) people (and yeah, I know, I'm arrogant, but why not)

Mwahahaha

 

[schneiw]

Take it from wence it comes of course.

Remember how they calculate DPP for example, spin doctors will always make things look better than they really are by twisting the numbers.

Game of Stats.

 

[Lefty]

When I reflect on it a little more, it really does seem that the happiest days throughout Entropia's history was when there was stackable mu% for all. The time period where hunters camped argos for Iron and drones for gazz etc. I think the psychology of gamers being able to contribute to the economy, as in, at least some of their loot was in demand might have had a far greater effect than just helping returns... just a thought

This.
What exactly is the point of loots we can't have some fun using? Of course every game has some amount of vendor trash loot to help us appreciate useful and/or cool stuff when we get it, but in a game in which the majority of loots are stackable or (L) (constant flow loots rather than one-time coolness), most of those loots need to have some use which enhances the in-game experience.

 

[Lefty]

That was the time of an expanding universe. When there are lots of people 'buying in', there is more MU, too.

Although you can still farm argos for iron. Sometimes it seems they drop more of it when MU is higher - it's as if the system has a sales plan, and if FOMA miners don't dig up enough iron, it's being stuffed into argos.

Seems true though... I notice right after the introduction of Widget and Gizmo bp's increased demand for Belkar, Belkar started globalling more often.

 

[Rocket192]

Seems true though... I notice right after the introduction of Widget and Gizmo bp's increased demand for Belkar, Belkar started globalling more often.

getting closer......

 

[Semm]

Developer Notes #13 - Loot 2.0 Statistics
<...>

• Net return for accounts created in 2017, cycling at least 100 PED since VU 15.15: 94.87%
• Net return for accounts created in 2017: 93.47%

Originally Posted Here

What's the point to specify accounts created in 2017?

Very nice that you finally found your testicles MA.
Thanks for the communication efforts, really appreciated =)

 

[morfoc]

Magnificent post of MA lol
The sheep are happy or not
They put what they want
an example ? :
I deposited + 100kped and turn over more 400k I had lost everything ped card 0 but MA told me :

2015-02-19 08:26 Entropia Universe Support:


Hi,

We have examined your avatar’s activity back to June 2014 and have found nothing out of the ordinary. The returns your avatar has experienced are well within the expected range and consistent with those of other participants with similar levels of activity. In fact your TT return is positive in your favor.

The actual TT return you had on your crafting activity in this time is 105%. And if we only focus on this year your return is 117%, in your favor.

In this we are not including market value which in the case you buy things with high markup works to your disadvantage or if you sell with high markup makes your return even better. Please also note markup is not anything MindArk earns money on.


Kind Regards
Entropia Universe Support


Before the 2.0 you were all equal but not really , Now you are all equal in the loss
We have already paid for cryengine but we did not have the graphic evolution promised

There is always 1/2 visible character winning for advertising it is normal by its can be change


They take 5% but finish the game before

Correct already the cross of the weapons that enters the armor
Correct already the squares of sun horrible bug
Correct the textures of the monsters
Add real movements
Readd Blood
add impact on mob
add deterioration armor visible