Please MA be more transparent

Answer questions like, is enhancer consumption rate based on benefit added or a flat rate? (With some random number to dictate when)

Does eco really matter? I.e. in terms of ratios/percentage returned.

Obviously if you kill 1000 boorum for 1100 ped and get 80% return you will lose more money than if you kill 1000 boorum for 1000 ped and get 80% return.

(Please note I don't think there is a flat rate of return, perhaps it is better to use an example of one mob)

Okay 1 boorum costing 3 ped to kill with one gun, and 3.5 ped with another gun. Some algorithm maybe like okay going to give 2.679 loot times cost to kill.

One gun gives 8.04 ped, another gun gives 9.38 ped. Thus more ped earned with uneco.

Conversely this time loot is going to be 0.62 of cost to kill. One gun gives 1.86 (1.14 loss), another gun gives 2.17 (1.33 loss). So there is more risk/reward with an uneco gun than an eco gun?

Or alternatively, is there a sort of flat amount for the mob? So the uneco gun always loses out?

This won't exactly crack the code on how to profit, but it will alleviate some anxieties people may have about not knowing.

These are kind of the fundamentals of hunting and should be better than anyones uninformed ad-hoc reckoning. Everyone has a totally different idea. I know eco-deniers who do great and hunt all day every day and deposit like $40 a year. Are they just super lucky or do you get rewarded based on input or what?

"developer notes" informed us eco does indeed matter.

In the example I gave eco matters in both scenarios.

Saying eco matters is extremely vague.

How much it matters depends on whether a mob was destined to pay x amount, or whether that mob pays based on what it cost to kill it.

Also enhancer consumption has a massive effect on eco. Gotta make sure that our trust in them is well placed

Sierra said:

In the example I gave eco matters in both scenarios.

Saying eco matters is extremely vague.

How much it matters depends on whether a mob was destined to pay x amount, or whether that mob pays based on what it cost to kill it.

Also enhancer consumption has a massive effect on eco. Gotta make sure that our trust in them is well placed

Click to expand...

Read the developer notes. It seems rather apparent that this has not been done.

Do an experiment, don't think sample size will matter much for this but:

Kill 2500 puny mobs using an appropriate weapon with decent eco

Kill 2500 puny mobs using a heavily overpowered weapon. You can get a FreanD Delta, Karma Killer or Maddox IV for a few peds. Slap an amp on. Perhaps you can find something with more overkill.

Compare results.

WhiningSkeptic said:

Do an experiment, don't think sample size will matter much for this but:

Kill 2500 puny mobs using an appropriate weapon with decent eco

Kill 2500 puny mobs using a heavily overpowered weapon. You can get a FreanD Delta, Karma Killer or Maddox IV for a few peds. Slap an amp on. Perhaps you can find something with more overkill.

Compare results.

Click to expand...

Or even more fun hunt with a massivly over amped weapon. For instance cb5+dante.

A few years ago I started testing this with the hunt the thing tt gun and a dante, but stopped my tests when i accidentally TTed the amp that was still attached to the gun. (support gave the amp back a few days later, but my interest had waned in that time)

In the small amount I did test though, I got significantly more loot per kill using the shotgun?+dante than I did using a proper 'eco' setup. (not enough more to be worth the stupidity ofc though)

narfi said:

Or even more fun hunt with a massivly over amped weapon. For instance cb5+dante.

A few years ago I started testing this with the hunt the thing tt gun and a dante, but stopped my tests when i accidentally TTed the amp that was still attached to the gun. (support gave the amp back a few days later, but my interest had waned in that time)

In the small amount I did test though, I got significantly more loot per kill using the shotgun?+dante than I did using a proper 'eco' setup. (not enough more to be worth the stupidity ofc though)

Click to expand...

Interesting...

I think MA told us that there are no such thing as a personal loot pool, that the loot you get has nothing to do with the money you spent on killing the mob.

Was your results strong enough to convince you that there in fact is a difference or could it have been by chance?

WhiningSkeptic said:

Do an experiment, don't think sample size will matter much for this but:

Kill 2500 puny mobs using an appropriate weapon with decent eco

Kill 2500 puny mobs using a heavily overpowered weapon. You can get a FreanD Delta, Karma Killer or Maddox IV for a few peds. Slap an amp on. Perhaps you can find something with more overkill.

Compare results.

Click to expand...

Overkill and beeing uneco are two different things.

I.e. killing punies with uneco SIB weapon will give you higher common looters than using very eco SIB gun (and mostlikely minis too) - its very easy to test and i have done it, but doing overkill does not increase loot (at least not anymore or not visible imidietly)

Some observations:
- being uneco - increases loot imidietly.
- doing overkill does not increase loot - at least not imidietly.
- letting mob regen (even a lot) increases loot imidietly.

More important observations:
- you should ALWAYS hunt with maxed SIB weapons. This is much more important than dmg/pec on the weapon.
- you should NEVER use non-SIB weapons (unless you are +95 level or use some skill enhancers).

Biggest question that Sierra is asking: how this all is influencing your loot exactly.

MA stating that "beeing eco matters" means nothing.

For example beeing 3.0 dmg/pec you can get 91% TT returns long term and beeing 2.7 dmg/pec you can get 90% TT returns. In this case: yes eco matters but the intuitive difference should be 10% not 1%...

@op:
I am sure we will not get any answers.

Falagor

WhiningSkeptic said:

Interesting...

I think MA told us that there are no such thing as a personal loot pool, that the loot you get has nothing to do with the money you spent on killing the mob.

Was your results strong enough to convince you that there in fact is a difference or could it have been by chance?

Click to expand...

I was convinced.
Though i did not draw any conclusion towards a 'loot pool'.
My conclusion tied it directly to cost to kill the individual creature looted.

Another method of testing I had heard of was killing creatures with a rocket by shooting near them but never directly hitting them, so that they only get splash damage but the primary damage is always wasted.(I'm not sure if rockets still work that way or not)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: more than 2yrs has gone by since I did that and things may have (probably?) changed since then as well.

One particularly useful use for this 'theory' would be/was in global competitions where you could force a creature to global more often than it normally would. (for instance if a normal 'mini' for a creature is 40ped, you could force more globals by being at least 25% more wasteful or uneco in your kill of it thus pushing the 40ped up to 50) (I never really had the interest or ped card to test this aspect of it, but it has been a 'common' rumor since as long as I can remember)

WhiningSkeptic said:

Interesting...

I think MA told us that there are no such thing as a personal loot pool, that the loot you get has nothing to do with the money you spent on killing the mob.

Was your results strong enough to convince you that there in fact is a difference or could it have been by chance?

Click to expand...

i did such little test too some time ago...
see here (numbers)
https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/showthread.php?236806-Player-s-Notes-vol-1-Hunting-Loot-Mechanics&p=3053477&highlight=#post3053477

WhiningSkeptic said:

Interesting...
I think MA told us that there are no such thing as a personal loot pool, that the loot you get has nothing to do with the money you spent on killing the mob.

Click to expand...

i think you misunderstand "personal lootpool"...
it was long time believed that at some time part of your losses come back to you because you have "personal lootpool"..so you spend ped into own pool and bam at some point get back..

I have read a official statement that said eco does matter!
Marco said that MA's source of income has nothing to do with the "loot pool" but from our decay!
With that being said, it is pretty clear that eco is the only thing that matters.
Maybe its time for them to say it again!

Sierra said:

In the example I gave eco matters in both scenarios.

Saying eco matters is extremely vague.

How much it matters depends on whether a mob was destined to pay x amount, or whether that mob pays based on what it cost to kill it.

Also enhancer consumption has a massive effect on eco. Gotta make sure that our trust in them is well placed

Click to expand...

Here you go: https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/showthread.php?228884-Developer-Notes-3

A second and very important part of efficient hunting is to consider the relative cost of using a particular weapon, often referred to as weapon economy, usually measured as damage per PEC. This measures how efficiently, in terms of weapon decay and ammo consumption, a weapon produces each point of damage. An avatar will enjoy much better overall hunting results over time when using weapons with higher damage per pec. Many community websites, such as www.entropiawiki.com, offer detailed statistics on the economy of nearly all the various weapons available in Entropia Universe. The MindArk development team is also considering including more detailed economy statistics on the item information panel in an upcoming release to improve the availability of such information.

Click to expand...

(But if you've issues trusting official info I can assure you: you are not alone lol)

Of course ECO matters, else it would not be here.

But how it exactly works is little bit more complex than just simple cost to kill.

Average eco of population matters a lot. If average ECO of population is 2.8, then you will do fine with 2.85.. If average eco of population is 2.9 you wont do any real good with 2.8

Now the average eco is different for different weapon types. For long time melee weapons had lower ECO, but as their general ECO was lower, you could do ok. Now, I don't think you want to hunt without a melee amp, as those shifted general ECO much higher nowadays.

Also, in general ECO got higher, when 2.7 was okish few years back, 2.8 now sucks

To win on one event where highest global win or where number of killed mobs count and to be ECO you must use highest bad ass gun with crasy amp on it wich for sure would be non eco in case of solo grinding.

PW3CKA said:

Of course ECO matters, else it would not be here.

But how it exactly works is little bit more complex than just simple cost to kill.

Average eco of population matters a lot. If average ECO of population is 2.8, then you will do fine with 2.85.. If average eco of population is 2.9 you wont do any real good with 2.8

Now the average eco is different for different weapon types. For long time melee weapons had lower ECO, but as their general ECO was lower, you could do ok. Now, I don't think you want to hunt without a melee amp, as those shifted general ECO much higher nowadays.

Also, in general ECO got higher, when 2.7 was okish few years back, 2.8 now sucks

Click to expand...

Using 'uneco' Emik X5 (many times with 7-8 dmg enhancers) resulted in tt return of 92%, while many people with better eco weapons claim to have much worse returns.

What many people do not understand is that eco of gun is only one factor that matters.
For example with higher damage gun with lesser eco you can kill mob much quicker than with better eco, lower dps one. As a result you will save some PED on armor and FAP decay. This will increase overall eco of setup.

Teiwaz Storm said:

Using 'uneco' Emik X5 (many times with 7-8 dmg enhancers) resulted in tt return of 92%, while many people with better eco gweapons claim to have much worse returns.

What many people do not understand is that eco of gun is only one factor that matters.
For example with higher damage gun with lesser eco you can kill mob much quicker than with better eco, lower dps one. As a result you will save some PED on armor and FAP decay. This will increase overall eco of setup.

Click to expand...

I find that things like range often gets neglected. Sometimes a lower dpp can be more eco if range is sufficient to kill the mob before it reaches you.

Setups should be adapted to specific mobs to be the most efficient.

WhiningSkeptic said:

I find that things like range often gets neglected. Sometimes a lower dpp can be more eco if range is sufficient to kill the mob before it reaches you.

Setups should be adapted to specific mobs to be the most efficient.

Click to expand...

Yes, range is another factor, just like high dps.

Teiwaz Storm said:

Using 'uneco' Emik X5 (many times with 7-8 dmg enhancers) resulted in tt return of 92%, while many people with better eco weapons claim to have much worse returns.

What many people do not understand is that eco of gun is only one factor that matters.
For example with higher damage gun with lesser eco you can kill mob much quicker than with better eco, lower dps one. As a result you will save some PED on armor and FAP decay. This will increase overall eco of setup.

Click to expand...

Yep, exactly. There are multiple factors, I was just trying to explain how ECO itself works. But of course it's not everything.. For example with Vincent DPS, I can be ECO and not use DMG enhancers, but if I go and hunt scipulor the cost of the enhancers is lower then cost of armor decay w/o then.. It's every time about math and adapting your setup to the given mob

WhiningSkeptic said:

Do an experiment, don't think sample size will matter much for this but:

Kill 2500 puny mobs using an appropriate weapon with decent eco

Kill 2500 puny mobs using a heavily overpowered weapon. You can get a FreanD Delta, Karma Killer or Maddox IV for a few peds. Slap an amp on. Perhaps you can find something with more overkill.

Compare results.

Click to expand...

I did this once (wore armor, pulled as many as I could used as many weapons as possible)....got a 72 ped puny global. (overall loot was higher without it)

It changed my view on eco, and hence I do not follow eco at all, I go against it specifically.
There are reasons to want to make old school guns unappealing.

forgo said:

I did this once (wore armor, pulled as many as I could used as many weapons as possible)....got a 72 ped puny global.

It changed my view on eco, and hence I do not follow eco at all, I go against it specifically.
There are reasons to want to make old school guns unappealing.

Click to expand...

Gz! I thought my 17PED puny was about as high as it could get. Guess I was wrong...

I'll actually gonna do some logging. Need some sort of motivation to finish the puny mission. Guess I'll do 5k with two different setups.

PW3CKA said:

Of course ECO matters, else it would not be here.

But how it exactly works is little bit more complex than just simple cost to kill.

Average eco of population matters a lot. If average ECO of population is 2.8, then you will do fine with 2.85.. If average eco of population is 2.9 you wont do any real good with 2.8

Now the average eco is different for different weapon types. For long time melee weapons had lower ECO, but as their general ECO was lower, you could do ok. Now, I don't think you want to hunt without a melee amp, as those shifted general ECO much higher nowadays.

Also, in general ECO got higher, when 2.7 was okish few years back, 2.8 now sucks

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm a new player but trying to work out how the game works.
This is an interesting statement. It suggests that players have to lose money for others to gain it. How does that work?

I had hoped that every creature killed would have an independent chance of dropping x amount, therefore the cheaper you can kill it the better your average returns will be.

If that were the case, there would be a break even point at which you could on average make a profit, so does sound unrealistic. Saying that, the cost of economy over 3.0 is probability going to be limited to a small number of players.

Starbuckx said:

Sorry, I'm a new player but trying to work out how the game works.
This is an interesting statement. It suggests that players have to lose money for others to gain it. How does that work?

I had hoped that every creature killed would have an independent chance of dropping x amount, therefore the cheaper you can kill it the better your average returns will be.

If that were the case, there would be a break even point at which you could on average make a profit, so does sound unrealistic. Saying that, the cost of economy over 3.0 is probability going to be limited to a small number of players.

Click to expand...

The thing is that nobody exactly knows how the systems works, there are just too many variables. And if somebody broke the formula he won't definitely share it.

God knows how it is now after recent loot changes. .But for example int he past, the 3.0 ECO barrier in fact guaranteed a profit.

But the average ECO of population was much lower, like 2.7ish or 2.8ish, so those guys with 3.0 were completely on TOP..

And again, as some people mentioned ECO is not the ultimate thing. There are other factors, one of them is definitely luck

Still don't forget to follow one of the golden rules which is that you should no TT your stuff, keep it in storage, create stacks and sell to traders/ crafters or through auction. This is now more simple with recent loot distribution changes.

The ultimate golden rule is that "pec makes ped" , this is just given.

Don't listen to people who say that they play completely un-eco and are doing well. They don't know they would do twice that well if they would not waste peds

PW3CKA said:

The thing is that nobody exactly knows how the systems works, there are just too many variables. And if somebody broke the formula he won't definitely share it.

God knows how it is now after recent loot changes. .But for example int he past, the 3.0 ECO barrier in fact guaranteed a profit.

But the average ECO of population was much lower, like 2.7ish or 2.8ish, so those guys with 3.0 were completely on TOP..

And again, as some people mentioned ECO is not the ultimate thing. There are other factors, one of them is definitely luck

Still don't forget to follow one of the golden rules which is that you should no TT your stuff, keep it in storage, create stacks and sell to traders/ crafters or through auction. This is now more simple with recent loot distribution changes.

The ultimate golden rule is that "pec makes ped" , this is just given.

Don't listen to people who say that they play completely un-eco and are doing well. They don't know they would do twice that well if they would not waste peds

Click to expand...

Yeah I'm trying to avoid people's comments who say eco doesn't matter, but it will confuse a lot of people.

I could be wrong, but as I understand it the only thing that should matter is Economy (How cheaply you can kill a mob)
Economy = Ammo +Decay (weapon & Armor) + Healing Cost
- Using no armor = No armor decay
- Killing from long range = no heling costs
- Using maxed weapons = They are maximum efficiency
- Using the most efficient weapon = Highest Dmg/PEC possible but it will cost you to buy.
- Minimising overkill = minimal wasted costs - User a finisher weapon.
- Using AMP's - this seems to be a cheap way to increase efficiency
- I am still not sure about mob regen, people have stated regened health pays)
- I don't understand the benefits of enhancers yet. In theory they must improve your stats or there is no point being in the game, but how much MU are they worth before they start costing you money??

If you can do the above and get say 3.0DMG/PEC (which would be very expensive to achieve) it then comes down to luck.
Luck (probability) is built into the game, so overtime your "luck" should average out.
Lets assume this is the break even point (I would love it if it were lower, but it would have to be a point that is very difficult to obtain or the game would make a loss)

If you take 10 runs of 100PED each. : 3.0DMG.PEC you can take out 30,000 HP worth of Mobs

You might make 50-150PED say at tt value on each run, but on average you get 1000 PED back after 10 runs (probably would take more runs).

You can still make a little profit on any items that have MU.

What I'm trying to understand is, whether there is anything else that can impact this? Statements like you need other players to be lower makes me suggest there are other factors like prize pools for globals to be paid out like a fruit machine would. WHich would make payouts much more variable, and if stuff like this exists it should not be a secret.
When I started playing I'm sure I noticed better payouts in icarus when more people were hunting there but it could be completly random results.
Also hunting Kerb's the last few weeks I had a couple of days where I got 8-9 globals in a day, then more recently I've only been getting 1-2 a day and of much lower amounts. Is this just down to luck.

It would be good to know if its not just down to killing efficiently.

If they were more transparent no one would play....

I'm not convinced of that. People know the odds for casino games and yet they still flock to them.

If you like gambling, as long as the odds aren't too in favor of the house, and you can afford it then you'll play.

Uncertainty is what stops me from playing this game as much as I might otherwise.

Starbuckx said:

Sorry, I'm a new player but trying to work out how the game works.
This is an interesting statement. It suggests that players have to lose money for others to gain it. How does that work?

Click to expand...

This is exactly what happens.

MA is a business. They make their money off people losing money on the product. The goal is to make everyone lose approx 5% of their deposits, over the long term. This gives the fabled 95% return everyone talks about.

Of course that isnt how it works. Some people need to win in order to generate appeal.

So some people have to lose more than 95% too, in order to pay for those winnings.

That's the nature of the game. Well, that and most people on the planet have a HUGE ego and think that they are going to be the one to crack the code and beat the system. That's a big part of the game too. Without that nothing else would matter.

Magyar_Republic said:

This is exactly what happens.

MA is a business. They make their money off people losing money on the product. The goal is to make everyone lose approx 5% of their deposits, over the long term. This gives the fabled 95% return everyone talks about.

Of course that isnt how it works. Some people need to win in order to generate appeal.

So some people have to lose more than 95% too, in order to pay for those winnings.

That's the nature of the game. Well, that and most people on the planet have a HUGE ego and think that they are going to be the one to crack the code and beat the system. That's a big part of the game too. Without that nothing else would matter.

Click to expand...

Thanks Magyar, I do understand the Business model and this is fine. If I knew I'd only lose 5% overtime I'd be happy, but I don't think i'm closing to averaging that yet.
I'm specifically referring to hunting and 5% loss being TT value of loot. I understand if you can make a MU on items you might be able to reduce the loss further at times.

My understanding is if you hunt uneconomically you will lose more, and if you super eco them maybe you'll lose less.

Starbuckx said:

My understanding is if you hunt uneconomically you will lose more, and if you super eco them maybe you'll lose less.

Click to expand...

Thats true, more or less.

When you are first starting the losses are usually greater. The mobs just arent as rewarding, most of your money is going back into skills so that your progression can move you into larger weapons and different mob ranges.

Of course its your choice as a player whether you want to do this or not. The game will always push you into a higher risk zone.

Have to keep that in mind, too.

I am not sure, but I have a feeling we won't be getting the info you ask, because having this info would probably ruin the game.

See Quote by Magix under here