Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Info: Mindark Annual Report 2015

9.4 million tax refund... must be nice, even if it's only SEK :)
 
Last edited:
Count Joe said:
J

They change modell so PEDs are considerd giftcards.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know, and a giftcard is not a product. It's not a currency either, but it more like a currency than a product, because you can use both to get a product or service in exchange.
 
billairboy said:
Yes, I know, and a giftcard is not a product. It's not a currency either, but it more like a currency than a product, because you can use both to get a product or service in exchange.
Click to expand...
PED is not a giftcard. As a general rule giftcards can't be sold back, althou there's certain exceptions to that rule. PEDs are always two-way convertible like currency, no exceptions. That's why I prefer to look at PEDs as a currency not a product. Then again, it's a good thing if ppl have a different views on things.
It's a competitive game, people with better understanding of the internal logic of the system have an advantage in some situations. In a sense it's all part of the game. :yup:
 
Fifth said:
PED is not a giftcard. As a general rule giftcards can't be sold back, althou there's certain exceptions to that rule. PEDs are always two-way convertible like currency, no exceptions. That's why I prefer to look at PEDs as a currency not a product. Then again, it's a good thing if ppl have a different views on things.
It's a competitive game, people with better understanding of the internal logic of the system have an advantage in some situations. In a sense it's all part of the game. :yup:
Click to expand...

Well, let's say it's something between a giftcard/voucer and a currency. Like Bitcoin.... :p
 
billairboy said:
Well, let's say it's something between a giftcard/voucer and a currency. Like Bitcoin.... :p
Click to expand...


Bitcoin supplies are limited. PEDS or Giftcard / vouchers are not, as they are based on forever inflating currencies and can be created simply on "will".
 
xXSqUaLLXx said:
Bitcoin supplies are limited. PEDS or Giftcard / vouchers are not, as they are based on forever inflating currencies and can be created simply on "will".
Click to expand...

Does it matter? no. Neither is a real life currency. And Bitcoins are also created depending on the demand even if there is a theoretic limit to it. And you can never know for sure if they will change it either.
 
Rookie mistake mentioning bitcoin, billairboy :D. Now let the debate begin a new for the 465345235th time.


On a slightly more on topic question, MA recently licensed the EU platform to that Casino game(cant remember the name right now) this does not seem to be mentioned in the report from what i can see. Where would licensing fees coming into MA from that venture most likely show up in the accounting?
 
billairboy said:
Does it matter? no. Neither is a real life currency. And Bitcoins are also created depending on the demand even if there is a theoretic limit to it. And you can never know for sure if they will change it either.
Click to expand...

It maybe does not matter to you, but it did matter enough to me to make a comment about it.
 
melander said:
Rookie mistake mentioning bitcoin, billairboy :D. Now let the debate begin a new for the 465345235th time.

On a slightly more on topic question, MA recently licensed the EU platform to that Casino game(cant remember the name right now) this does not seem to be mentioned in the report from what i can see. Where would licensing fees coming into MA from that venture most likely show up in the accounting?
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry my mistake, I should not have mention it. :silly2:
I think it should be included in the net sales, but it could also be included in "other income".
 
atomicstorm said:
It does if those peds deposited are cycled. But at rest, they do not. And buying universal ammo is same as depositing peds.. it just forces you to cycle them. Very simple. No need to go down conspiracy theories even though you're quite an expert at that.

My logs (and others) show quite the opposite to your assertion.
Click to expand...

A while ago we talked about no current issues with loot with you stating that nothing is wrong

atomicstorm said:
I hit a 5 digit and was immediately in the +. However, my loots have been stunted for the last 14 months since then.
Click to expand...

Yet today you say that your loot hasn't been good for the last 14 months? And please don't use your 5 digit as an excuse for why you loot isn't as good as it was.
 
There is no mathematical way to explain how deposited peds could affect pay outs. All it would do is increase liabilities for MA, creating inflation in game and sending MA bankrupt.
 
dar hammer dei said:
There is no mathematical way to explain how deposited peds could affect pay outs. All it would do is increase liabilities for MA, creating inflation in game and sending MA bankrupt.
Click to expand...

We are looking at this at two different angles here. I'm saying there's a cap and you are saying there is no cap based on deposit.


I'm saying that if the game has a deposit of 100,000 dollars for the day then that cap would be 85% of that with MA making a 15% profit. The game would need to work on some sort of cap, not including MU here, to keep them from going bankrupt.

Now what you are saying is that there is no cap and it's all based on cycling where that money builds up and up .... and up and up until wow there is so much money in game that MA could never pay us back.

Of course we will never know how the system works, all I'm saying is that there HAS to be deposits work into the equation somewhere since well this game is based on RL money.

So back to my first point. If this was the case and we are seeing that loot return has been down for the last year or so since the store has opened, is MA bypassing the game system here where it's not seeing items bought in the store as deposits to effect the overall cap of the game?
 
OZtwo said:
We are looking at this at two different angles here. I'm saying there's a cap and you are saying there is no cap based on deposit.


I'm saying that if the game has a deposit of 100,000 dollars for the day then that cap would be 85% of that with MA making a 15% profit. The game would need to work on some sort of cap, not including MU here, to keep them from going bankrupt.

Now what you are saying is that there is no cap and it's all based on cycling where that money builds up and up .... and up and up until wow there is so much money in game that MA could never pay us back.

Of course we will never know how the system works, all I'm saying is that there HAS to be deposits work into the equation somewhere since well this game is based on RL money.

So back to my first point. If this was the case and we are seeing that loot return has been down for the last year or so since the store has opened, is MA bypassing the game system here where it's not seeing items bought in the store as deposits to effect the overall cap of the game?
Click to expand...



So are you saying for every 100,000 dollars deposited, MA then increase liabilities by 15% by paying this out to people cycling. So they now owe 115,000 dollars? How does this work if that deposited amount never gets cycled? It doesn't, it would cause inflation and liabilities to MA.
 
dar hammer dei said:
So are you saying for every 100,000 dollars deposited, MA then increase liabilities by 15% by paying this out to people cycling. So they now owe 115,000 dollars? How does this work if that deposited amount never gets cycled? It doesn't, it would cause inflation and liabilities to MA.
Click to expand...

See what you are describing here is cycling as I have been trying to tell you. Cycling would be where MA would have to increase the liabilities here. Whereas depositing would be a flat liability of $85,000 dollars that day which could be paid out. No increase here since well the cap is set to total amount in bank. And yes after that cycling would be in effect to cycle that 85,000 and to make sure that loot does not go over that cap.
 
OZtwo said:
See what you are describing here is cycling as I have been trying to tell you. Cycling would be where MA would have to increase the liabilities here. Whereas depositing would be a flat liability of $85,000 dollars that day which could be paid out. No increase here since well the cap is set to total amount in bank. And yes after that cycling would be in effect to cycle that 85,000 and to make sure that loot does not go over that cap.
Click to expand...

No what I'm describing here is deposits. Its in my post. The cycling may occur afterwards and there is where the liability drops.

No depositing 100,000$ is not a flat liability of 85000$. its a flat liability of 100,000$(-a pitiful amount of fees). I don't know where you make these numbers up.

They can't start making pay outs before the ped is cycled. It would be suicide.
 
OZtwo said:
We are looking at this at two different angles here. I'm saying there's a cap and you are saying there is no cap based on deposit.


I'm saying that if the game has a deposit of 100,000 dollars for the day then that cap would be 85% of that with MA making a 15% profit. The game would need to work on some sort of cap, not including MU here, to keep them from going bankrupt.

Now what you are saying is that there is no cap and it's all based on cycling where that money builds up and up .... and up and up until wow there is so much money in game that MA could never pay us back.

Of course we will never know how the system works, all I'm saying is that there HAS to be deposits work into the equation somewhere since well this game is based on RL money.

So back to my first point. If this was the case and we are seeing that loot return has been down for the last year or so since the store has opened, is MA bypassing the game system here where it's not seeing items bought in the store as deposits to effect the overall cap of the game?
Click to expand...


Let me put some basic math here even though I know I am wasting my time.

Player A deposits $100,000
Player B wins your 85% cap of $100,000 from cycling
Player A withdraws $100,000
Player B withdraws $85,000


=loss of $185,000. or loss of $85,000 dollars depending how you look at it.


Either way MA losses. So how is this sustainable?
 
Last edited:
dar hammer dei said:
Let me put some basic math here even though I know I am wasting my time.

Player A deposits $100,000
Player B wins your 85% cap of $100,000 from cycling
Player A withdraws $100,000
Player B withdraws $85,000


=loss of $185,000. or loss of $85,000 dollars depending how you look at it.


Either way MA losses. So how is this sustainable?
Click to expand...

If player B wins your 85% cap, surely player A has lost that $100,000... So if player B withdraws $85,000 MA is still +$15,000...?
 
Said I was going to leave this till tomorrow but people seem to have no idea how maths works ....


The ped paid out to people through loot has nothing to do with DEPOSITS.

If it did and I deposited $1m and did NOT cycle it your method would mean that someone can still win a percentage of my deposit even though I have it on my card. This would result in a loss for MA as I could simply withdraw my $1m (minus fees) and the players would win 85% of that deposit and then cash it out also.

How it Works.

If I deposit $1m and contribute $500k to the universe via cycling in any profession that ped is added to the pool that is available either universe wide or personally (this part will never be proven) That means the available ped available to be looted by a participant is 90% or so of the peds currently contributed to the system and not currently held in the tt of my card or items. In this case $450k worth (assuming I had 0% returns).




If anyone states again that loot is 100% tied to the daily deposits I will fly you to Australia where I will proceed to throw white tip spiders at you till you change your mind. (If you don't know what they are just google what their bites do)

Edit: Or You can go swimming with some Great Whites, I don't mind.
 
Seregi said:
If anyone states again that loot is 100% tied to the daily deposits I will fly you to Australia where I will proceed to throw white tip spiders at you till you change your mind. (If you don't know what they are just google what their bites do)

Edit: Or You can go swimming with some Great Whites, I don't mind.
Click to expand...

Will you fly me out there if I change my mind as soon as I land?

If so... Loot's tied to daily deposits!
 
It's the cycling that causes loot on mobs, not deposits.

Go to a place on Cyrene that hasn't bee hunted in a long time, the first 4-5 kills will be no looters, then suddenly loot starts to develop.
 
Scurvy Sityl said:
It's the cycling that causes loot on mobs, not deposits.

Go to a place on Cyrene that hasn't bee hunted in a long time, the first 4-5 kills will be no looters, then suddenly loot starts to develop.
Click to expand...

This is wrong.

Payback is based on mob HP. It's very simple.
 
Aio said:
This is wrong.

Payback is based on mob HP. It's very simple.
Click to expand...

It's both, and it's not simple.

The mob HP (and regeneration and mob damage output) determination base multiplier.

But the actual multipliers given are random and effected by the loot pool of the server.
 
dar hammer dei said:
Let me put some basic math here even though I know I am wasting my time.

Player A deposits $100,000
Player B wins your 85% cap of $100,000 from cycling
Player A withdraws $100,000
Player B withdraws $85,000


=loss of $185,000. or loss of $85,000 dollars depending how you look at it.


Either way MA losses. So how is this sustainable?
Click to expand...

Short answer MA would take a lose for that day but still would not go bankrupt based on the overall cap of deposits for the year.

Long answer which is what we are seeing now. The system would not allow player B to win that 85% based on it being so close to what the cap of the day is.

I'm not talking about personal loot pools or even loot pools here. I'm simply talking about the CAP that has to be put in place based on total money in bank based on deposits.

As well your way of thinking how the system works without a cap to base payout would work something like this:

Deposits for the day: 0.00
layer B wins your 85% cap of $100,000 from cycling
Player A withdraws $100,000
Player B withdraws $85,000

MA would loose 185,000 dollars for the day.
 
Last edited:
The loot-pool/jackpot machine is refilled when ammunition are consumed, probes dropped and resources consumed when crafting. Probably some % of the decay on melee weapons are also added to the pool. The loot are based on 1. HP of the Mob 2. A roll of a dice 3. Amount of peds in the loot-pool 4. Maye some more minor factors.

So, deposits don't directly effect the loot, only if they consume in hunting, mining or crafting. I can't see that the system can my much different than that.
 
OZtwo said:
Short answer MA would take a lose for that day but still would not go bankrupt based on the overall cap of deposits for the year.

Long answer which is what we are seeing now. The system would not allow player B to win that 85% based on it being so close to what the cap of the day is.

I'm not talking about personal loot pools or even loot pools here. I'm simply talking about the CAP that has to be put in place based on total money in bank based on deposits.

As well your way of thinking how the system works without a cap to base payout would work something like this:

Deposits for the day: 0.00
layer B wins your 85% cap of $100,000 from cycling
Player A withdraws $100,000
Player B withdraws $85,000

MA would loose 185,000 dollars for the day.
Click to expand...



Show your math please.
 
Scurvy Sityl said:
It's both, and it's not simple.

The mob HP (and regeneration and mob damage output) determination base multiplier.

But the actual multipliers given are random and effected by the loot pool of the server.
Click to expand...

Anecdotally I would have to believe this is true on some level.

Empty planets / empty zones have always given me surprisingly stable/consistent loot. Then I head over to hunt Kerbs @ Osere during peak hours and it's either 50% Return or 150% :cool:

I've noticed some similar patterns with mining as well. But not enough data to be "certain".

I want to say server-specific loot pools probably exist on some level. But obviously the "huge" multipliers have to be drawing from something larger.
 
dar hammer dei said:
Show your math please.
Click to expand...

Well sorry as you stated:

dar hammer dei said:
There is no mathematical way to explain how deposited peds could affect pay outs. All it would do is increase liabilities for MA, creating inflation in game and sending MA bankrupt.
Click to expand...

There is just no mathematical way to show how the system needs to be based on a house cap to regulate how much each day to day loot is released in game.:smoke:

Also I guess another way to look at it if the game was only based on Cycling and not total recent deposit in house would be that the game would be dealing with old time players who have been cycling their PEDs for years slowly withdrawing as needed. Bleeding the system until there really is no money left in the game other than the majority who cycle the peds. This as well could crash the system or bankrupt MA. So again MA needs to have a system set in place to monitor the current deposit amount and adjust the overall loot return based on it.

At the end we are just going around and around since yes Cycling plays a BIG part in the loot return. BUT before Cycling comes into play the system first needs to check how much money it can give out in the cycling.
 
OZtwo said:
Well sorry as you stated:



There is just no mathematical way to show how the system needs to be based on a house cap to regulate how much each day to day loot is released in game.:smoke:

Also I guess another way to look at it if the game was only based on Cycling and not total recent deposit in house would be that the game would be dealing with old time players who have been cycling their PEDs for years slowly withdrawing as needed. Bleeding the system until there really is no money left in the game other than the majority who cycle the peds. This as well could crash the system or bankrupt MA. So again MA needs to have a system set in place to monitor the current deposit amount and adjust the overall loot return based on it.

At the end we are just going around and around since yes Cycling plays a BIG part in the loot return. BUT before Cycling comes into play the system first needs to check how much money it can give out in the cycling.
Click to expand...


Oh my god. I'm done.

Peace out
 
I honestly cant tell if OZtwo really believes his point of view or if this is indeed an epic troll .....

I think I am going to lean towards it being the latter.
 
Scurvy Sityl said:
It's both, and it's not simple.

The mob HP (and regeneration and mob damage output) determination base multiplier.

But the actual multipliers given are random and effected by the loot pool of the server.
Click to expand...
ZPF said:
Anecdotally I would have to believe this is true on some level.

Empty planets / empty zones have always given me surprisingly stable/consistent loot. Then I head over to hunt Kerbs @ Osere during peak hours and it's either 50% Return or 150% :cool:

I've noticed some similar patterns with mining as well. But not enough data to be "certain".

I want to say server-specific loot pools probably exist on some level. But obviously the "huge" multipliers have to be drawing from something larger.
Click to expand...
This.
Suppose we can call this the "mainstream [loot] theory" (as in: that's how most people see things). :yup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top