Shared Loot Problem with ESI

I think its important to have a few random drops that everyone has a chance on when going after shared mobs, the chance to win something nice even when your dps sucks compared to others is what keeps people showing up.
However with a drop like the ESI that already has a very high markup its like handing out the trophy randomly during average kills - i think Tacos suggestion to split up the esi value and hand out several smaller esis instead is a great idea and might solve a big part of the main issue.
Apart from that there still should be certain amount of damage being done to qualify for any special drops to avoid people creating alt accounts and popping in one shot for the 'esi luck factor'...
 
So your chance not getting the ESI is 40% what is not a low chance tbh !

24 drops, is not a large sample that will allow any conclusion about loot distribution.

If you state that you always got the other items, where you also have had a chance of 40% not getting it (60% total damage done), you are a damn lucky hunter on this shared loot mobs, as you got way more than you ever should expect in items.

That balances out the lesser luck with the ESI drops.

Actually I can say that never any item dropped to me from a shared loot, and my gun is not that total noob gun.
Surely can´t compete with the UBER DPS guns, but every here and then I should have been lucky aswell, but that doesn´t happen to me yet.

Do I start a thread about it, hey I did 5% total DMG on a shared loot mob, and last 200 items dropped to someone else, there must be glitch, as I should have gotten at least 10 items out of 200 (average) from that 200 drops ???? NO I DON´T !!!
I know that 5% is a damn low chance, and I can live with it, not getting the items.

Just another unqualified whinning thread, nothing more!

Why do all high skilled hunters using big as gear always demand all loot belongs to them ????
This is not the case, but if you think this should be the case, don´t do shared mobs!

Man, this is not a typical whining thread. It isn't just those 24 times it happens. Don't change the facts to make your point. It is MUCH larger than that. And this thread is not about me bitching I didn't get it. It is about figuring out why very few top DPS EVER get the big ESI. Sure as a mid level dps you don't want us to talk about it, I even totally understand that and would also try to sweep it under the rug if I was you...but do NOT mistake my choice to stop with whining. The evidence is much great than the recent 24 looting events in a row that I cited. And I feel it is an issue that needs to be addressed if MA wants us to keep shooting.
 
Thanks guys for more responses, I just got home and had a chance to read them.

One thing I would like to add is I definitely get what some of you are saying...letting something with that high of MU go full dps-based probability would likely end up with big dps getting a overly disproportionate amount of mu.

I don't want that either.

I just think it is forced way to far to the other end of the spectrum, and the main purpose of this thread is to bring attention to it, provide ideas, and hope that MA listens, as they have many times before to mine, and many others, threads.
 
...
One thing I would like to add is I definitely get what some of you are saying...letting something with that high of MU go full dps-based probability would likely end up with big dps getting a overly disproportionate amount of mu.

I don't want that either.
...

Hey,

that is not exactly true. since you are doing x% of dmg you pay x% of the cost to kill, and have a x% chance of looting the ESI, it cancels (reduces?) each other out. thus the % of dmg one does is irrelevant to the amount of ESI you'd get on a long/large enough run. Although dealing 5dps will take 20 times the amount of time it would take with 100dps obviously. Still, in a fair (dmg weighted random) system the exact same % of TT loss would be covered for anyone regardless of their % on the dps.
 
Hey,

that is not exactly true. since you are doing x% of dmg you pay x% of the cost to kill, and have a x% chance of looting the ESI, it cancels (reduces?) each other out. thus the % of dmg one does is irrelevant to the amount of ESI you'd get on a long/large enough run. Although dealing 5dps will take 20 times the amount of time it would take with 100dps obviously. Still, in a fair (dmg weighted random) system the exact same % of TT loss would be covered for anyone regardless of their % on the dps.

you are right i suppose...I was more thinking along the lines of the mobs that are currently dropping a lot of ESI that I am hunting. When I wrote that, I envisioned getting a fair share of the ones that dropped recently (a very large amount), it would be a shitload of profit... because in the past few months soooooo damn many have dropped, so maybe these just dropping too many atm...and it is skewing my perception...

I hate to go off on a limb here, but someone in game pm'ed an interesting thought while I was offline...it definitely makes me pause and think...MA doesn't want players with lots of skills getting them because they will be tempted to chip out. New players on the way up are usually much less jaded about things like shitty hitboxes and less likely to chip out :)
 
And the very next L1119 Obama-Kong that was killed since I made this thread? 745 ped ESI to a L8 hunter. I wasn't there so I aint mad...just adding more evidence onto the pile :)
 
The only way out of this (that I can see), is to radically revamp the way looting works whilst teaming and for shared loot mobs.

  1. Mob killed gets assigned with overall value of loot in PEDs.
  2. Overall loot value is split via damage dealt basis.
  3. Only after this step...should the actual loot obtained by the person be generated from the mob's loot table.

In this way, each person in the team gets its fair share of loot (in PEDs) based upon how much damage they've dealt to the mob.

Futhermore, each person gets its own loot and has no one else to blame but "Lady Luck".

;)
 
Please reply to this doubt:

Do you think that you are geting a fair ammount of ESI when the size of them is low (or medium low)
Or it is the same thing and you don't get ESI ?
 
And the very next L1119 Obama-Kong that was killed since I made this thread? 745 ped ESI to a L8 hunter. I wasn't there so I aint mad...just adding more evidence onto the pile :)

these mobs drop esis so easily ?
big esis never freaking drop at arkadia
 
Lets break it down yo.

Probability of you not looting a single ESI across 24 samples assuming that ESI distribution is based on damage dealt and assuming you are dealing 60% of the total damage.

your chance to look per kill .6 or 60%
your chance to not loot per kil .4 or 40%

.4^24 = 0.00000000028147498
or
.000000028147498% chance to not loot a single ESI

I think we can rule this one out unless you are the unluckiest SOB on Entropia.



Probability of you not looting a single ESI if every participant has an equal chance of looting an ESI regardless of DPS and you and your friend are 2 of the 9 participants.

Your chance to loot per kill 2/9 or .2222recuring or 22.22% recurring
Your chance to not loot per kill 7/9 or .777777 recurring or 77.77% recurring

.77777^24 = 0.00240177728867684
or
.240177728867684%

Still really unlikely but possible that this level of bad luck is around.



I cant verify your data but assuming it is correct there may be an issue with the order that the loot is distributed or calculated. We could have an issue were loot distribution is suffering from some kind of WI flagging effect

For those of you who don't know what the Wi Flag means, a little history. From the beginning of AC, some players have complained about unbelievably bad luck. When the swarm of Lugians spawn in the citadel, they will go after certain players--every time. The player's level doesn't seem to matter, nor does the number of other players in the room. What does seem to matter is that this player is cursed with that most unfortunate of distinctions: the Wi Flag.


For some players, the flag came and went. For others, it was a perpetual nightmare, present in nearly every monster experience. To live a Wi-Flagged life meant to be hunted at every turn. Perhaps other adventurers could know peace in a BSD or a Citadel, but there was no rest nor respite for one under Wi.


Our developers at Turbine initially answered these complaints by saying that they could find no such bug. Occasionally, a senior Turbine engineer could be found who would admit that perhaps there was something "not quite right" with the system, but they still could not identify a cause, if one even existed. Easy culprits, such as a malfunctioning random-number generator, were eventually dismissed.


But our search went on. For there were people even at Turbine convinced that the Wi Flag existed, and that they had it in spades.


And then one day, long after most people had learned to either forget or ignore the Wi Flag, the answer was found. Here in the report from Sandra Powers, AC Live's Lead Engineer, on the nature of the Wi Flag. We warn you in advance that it is a very technical explanation, but we hope it is of some interest to those of you who have long been afflicted with this terrible burden.


"Many of our players have complained for a long time that their character are `Wi-Flagged'--that is, that creatures attack them a much greater proportion of the time than random chance or distance should dictate. After looking at the code in depth, I believe I have found out why this might happen.


Generally, a creature chooses whom to attack based on who it was last attacking, who attacked it last, or who caused it damage last. When players first enter the creature's detection radius, however, none of these things are useful yet, so the creature chooses a target randomly, weighted by distance. Players within the creature's detection sphere are weighted by how close they are to the creature -- the closer you are, the more chance you have to be selected to be attacked.


The actual algorithm for selection looks like this: We roll a random number within a certain range--say between 0 and 1. Each player is given a portion of the range based on how close they are to the creature. The closer you are, the larger a portion you get. The player who owns the portion into which the random number falls is selected to be attacked.


This algorithm is sound. The problem comes up when we are assigning portions of the range to various players. If we wanted distance from the creature to be proportional to your chance to be selected--that is, if the closer you are the *less* chance you have of being attacked--then we would assign this range by taking your distance from the creature over the total distance--the distances of everybody under consideration added together. But we really want the inverse of this ratio--so that the closer you are, the *more* chance you have of being selected. So we invert this ratio by subtracting it from 1 to assign you the size of your portion.


An example:

A is 5 meters from the creature.
B is 2 meters from the creature.
C is 3 meters from the creature.
D is 10 meters from the creature.
Total distance is 20.
The size of A's portion is 1 - 5/20, or 0.75.
The size of B's portion is 1 - 2/20, or 0.90.
The size of C's portion is 1 - 3/20, or 0.85.
The size of D's portion is 1 - 10/20, or 0.50.
So we assign these people these portions of the total range:
A has between 0.00 and 0.75.
B has between 0.75 and 1.65.
C has between 1.65 and 2.50.
D has between 2.50 and 3.00.

Notice, however, that while the original ratios added to 1 (.25 + .1 + .15 + .5 = 1.0) that the inverted ratios -- and thus the total range from which we should have rolled the random number -- no longer add to 1. Instead, they add to 3. (Some algebra will convince you that the assigned portions always add to n-1, where n is the number of people under consideration.) So in order to randomly select some portion of this total range, we should roll a number between 0 and 3.


But in the existing AC code, we always roll a number between 0 and 1.


You can easily see in this example that if the random number is always been 0 and 1, only A and B have any chance at all of being selected, and A has the majority of the chance. And the reason that these two have all the chance is simply because they are first in the list, and so were assigned the low parts of the range. Normally--if we had rolled between 0 and 3 in the example--your order in the list should have no effect on how likely you are to be chosen. But because we only rolled between 0 and 1, the earlier you appear in the list, the more skewed your chance of selection is. And as it happens, in AC code, your position in this list is determined by the InstanceID of your character, which is assigned when you create the character and never changed. (Note that the InstanceID is hashed--mutated by the system into another number--to determine position. So it's not a simple relationship like the older the character, the earlier in the list they will be. It is, however, a static relationship--an ID that hashes to an early position will always hash to an early position, although it's exact position will depend on what other ID's are also under consideration.)


So what does this mean? The way this random targeting algorithm is implemented right now, if you happen to have an InstanceID that hashes to an early position, you will tend to be attacked more than your fair share when the creature is using random targeting, regardless of your distance from the creature. In other words, you are Wi-Flagged."


We're glad we were finally able to fix this bug. With the July 2002 Event, may you know peace in the fast-spawning dungeon of your choice!

Pure maths is objective as it gets yo, can't really be any more fair than that ;)

:wtg:
 
And the very next L1119 Obama-Kong that was killed since I made this thread? 745 ped ESI to a L8 hunter. I wasn't there so I aint mad...just adding more evidence onto the pile :)

This is bad. (The whole ESI drop thing, not that this one guy got lucky, big grats to that guy :))

Really bad. Why?

Because eventually, people will have enough of it. I've noticed it myself (not the drops, but people getting fed up) when the guys dealing the most damage starts leaving, and it becomes unbearable. We need the high DPS crew around or shared loot won't work. While every damage that gets added counts, we still need the big guns for the big mobs.

It is as simple as this; One L50+ player with high-dps gear deals as much damage as 4-20 low level hunters. I've been top dps at times, and even without ESI drops, it has been frustrating to deal 120 dps (That's 40+ pec per second, 24 PED a minute, or 1440 PED an hour of constant shooting and I know alot of people can deal alot more) and get nothing due to high frequency of item drops (which does even out over time, I know, it's just hard to look at it long term when you have a bad night) or someone else getting lucky getting the item after shotting with a TT weapon.

If ESIs are distributed completely by chance, there's pretty much no reason for anyone to go high DPS on shared mobs except the thrill of gambling. The stacks lack markup in most cases (don't know about RT, but on Caly and Ark I'd say that's the case) and the item's rarely compensates that. If the ESIs are distributed by chance, it is as simple as the higher you move up the DPS ladder, the worse your risk:reward ratio turns.

Ugh.

Shared loot needs consistency in both spawns (So we can keep going, keep hunting the same sized mob until loot has time to even out) and consistency in how loot is shared (For instance less variance, more stackables, ESIs drop depending on damage dealt).

While I can't confirm the suspicions in the OP, I see no reason why people would make this up really. I'll chose to believe it for now.
 
Last edited:
They should really remove esi's on big boss mobs (on any planet), or limit it to 20 peds tt esi's max (maybe even multiple) and replace the loot with stackable items with markup (hey what about ESI-fragments :))
 
In my opinion:
1. I do not think it's fair that ESI be received by the lowest DPS!:eyecrazy:
2. I do not think it's fair that all items be received by those who have the highest DPS!:mad:
The fair solution:
All items to be removed from the loot, so the loot will be distributed equitably!:wise:
 
Please reply to this doubt:

Do you think that you are geting a fair ammount of ESI when the size of them is low (or medium low)
Or it is the same thing and you don't get ESI ?

When it is the normal 10-19 ped types, I have gotten some of them occassionally enough to assume that these are being distributed normally. I do believe I am way behind on those, but I can attribute that to bad luck still...it is not simply non-existent like big esi are.

My last somewhat decent esi was a 196 ped one from the first hogglo diablo spawn (the pilot skill fiasco) and I was there for 35 hours straight and was down over 4k ped when I got it. There has been 1-2 small 10-19 ped esi since then at shared, but as many of you know, I have done a TON of shared since then.
 
these mobs drop esis so easily ?
big esis never freaking drop at arkadia

Yeah, they are. If you do a bunch in one day, only you might not get more than 1-2 huge ESI, but if you do them every 2-3 days, the odds the first one or two has a huge ESI are like 80%. It has been like clockwork...if some days have passed where the L1119 wasn't killed, you can bet your ass the next one or two will be packing huge ESI.
 
Lets break it down yo.

Probability of you not looting a single ESI across 24 samples assuming that ESI distribution is based on damage dealt and assuming you are dealing 60% of the total damage.

your chance to look per kill .6 or 60%
your chance to not loot per kil .4 or 40%

.4^24 = 0.00000000028147498
or
.000000028147498% chance to not loot a single ESI

I think we can rule this one out unless you are the unluckiest SOB on Entropia.



Probability of you not looting a single ESI if every participant has an equal chance of looting an ESI regardless of DPS and you and your friend are 2 of the 9 participants.

Your chance to loot per kill 2/9 or .2222recuring or 22.22% recurring
Your chance to not loot per kill 7/9 or .777777 recurring or 77.77% recurring

.77777^24 = 0.00240177728867684
or
.240177728867684%

Still really unlikely but possible that this level of bad luck is around.



I cant verify your data but assuming it is correct there may be an issue with the order that the loot is distributed or calculated. We could have an issue were loot distribution is suffering from some kind of WI flagging effect



Pure maths is objective as it gets yo, can't really be any more fair than that ;)

:wtg:


I submitted a 20k withdrawal about 5 months ago...(my first withdrawal since late 2010 when I sold out and chipped out a bunch of skill)...now that you mention it, my ESI looting ended that day. :eyecrazy:
 
shared loot mobs should drop only shrapnell. Problem solved!
 
shared loot mobs should drop only shrapnell. Problem solved!
In my opinion:
1. I do not think it's fair that ESI be received by the lowest DPS!:eyecrazy:
2. I do not think it's fair that all items be received by those who have the highest DPS!:mad:
The fair solution:
All items to be removed from the loot, so the loot will be distributed equitably!:wise:
You need to have the same hope and dreams of looting something good (as regular loot) from big shared or no one will hunt them then either...

So making it all shrapnel is not a good solution.

Other items work out fair enough over time, we all know this and 90% of those that tried shared long enough still continue to hunt, because we all believe the standard dps-based distributions works fine. For most items, not ESI of course. ESI have their own rules. And THAT is what the issue is.

They should really remove esi's on big boss mobs (on any planet), or limit it to 20 peds tt esi's max (maybe even multiple) and replace the loot with stackable items with markup (hey what about ESI-fragments :))

yep, I agree...
IF the game decides to drop big ESI on a shared mob, it should split it up based on DPS just like stacks are. That is the best solution...removing them and other items completely is not. Not if they want us to keep shooting shared.
 
Last edited:
market prices have been going up on esi's, you say a lot have been dropping. coincidence? maybe they should just change it to schrap.... n everyone can be pissed off. If more items drop with mu, instead of all this schrap that just gets turned over into more losses with NO mu, maybe that would round out the item drops a bit, and it wouldnt be so upsetting not to get the esi.

What percentage of the loot that drops now is schrap? Everyone wants the esi with 1000%, thats the lottery of it, but the small prizes have turned into a schrap 1% ammo gain, when we all know ammo turnover without some items with mu is a continual losing proposition. The odd person is getting the 1000% mu item and the majority are getting schrap with no mu and a loss. The schrap needs to be cut back and stuff needs to be dropped that people can sell so the majority aren't losing their shirt while a few people get the huge mu. :scratch2:
 
Back
Top