PlanetCalypsoForum.com :: Entropia Universe Discussion and Resources
Page 33 of 34 FirstFirst ... 23 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 332
  1. #321
    Elite Kerham's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    to the moon and back
    Avatar
    Kerawan Kerham Maddahy
    Society
    Project Y
    Posts
    4,728
    Images
    59
    There is no such way as "the one true correct way". That's what I am disputing. My ROI numbers are for 2017 & 2018, this year barely saw some 10k turnover which is indeed at 90%, the difference is visible, but for the moment I got this fixation on hunting. I still don't see the reduced average ROI as an argument against amping, but about bankroll and such.

    About where should miners go and what should pay and not and why, I will refrain from comments, I see EU as pvp.

  2. #322
    Elite trance's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Old Switzerland
    Avatar
    hypnotica TRANCE blain
    Society
    Natural Born Killers
    Posts
    4,206
    Images
    203
    Quote Originally Posted by kingofaces View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I pretty much recommend never using a DSEC or most other pre-amped finders for enmatter. .
    I tried some only ore runs with Dsec30 and all of those runs was more bad, as if i do both together. But im pretty sure it have to do with the places i always visite and mine there, no matter what finder i use. I just love to visite in a turnus all my good knowing places. Most of this places i visite are nice to use both.

    I only do ores, if i run indoor with bigger amps up, but that hapen rarly, about i most don't use amps and go indoor. (about enmatter, i find out, that you can find a lot of devils tal with Dsec30 and also nice for typo and cav sap)

  3. #323
    Dominant kingofaces's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    US
    Avatar
    Tony KingofAces Hans
    Posts
    383
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by trance View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I only do ores, if i run indoor with bigger amps up, but that hapen rarly, about i most don't use amps and go indoor. (about enmatter, i find out, that you can find a lot of devils tal with Dsec30 and also nice for typo and cav sap)
    While I agree depth is good for those, you'll pay less MU getting a similar depth regular finder and buying a similar sized amp. I'm at work so I can't check, but enmatter "amp-equivalent" MU on a DSEC 30 was around 110% if I recall correctly.

  4. #324
    Elite Kerham's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    to the moon and back
    Avatar
    Kerawan Kerham Maddahy
    Society
    Project Y
    Posts
    4,728
    Images
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by kingofaces View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    While I agree depth is good for those, you'll pay less MU getting a similar depth regular finder and buying a similar sized amp. I'm at work so I can't check, but enmatter "amp-equivalent" MU on a DSEC 30 was around 110% if I recall correctly.
    For comparable depth you need to use terra, which amplified with lvl2 would be more expensive, circa 107% for solo enm.

    Asuming finder decay is not recovered into finds,
    asuming Dsec 30 at 160%,
    then

    Dsec 30 "unamped" enmatter solo is 106,3%
    Dsec 30 "unamped" ores solo is 103,2%
    Dsec 30 "unamped" double-drop is 104,3%

    and then trends with the amp toward the MU of the amp, probably D-Class being the best pick from this pov.

    What is absolutely fantastic about Dsec30 (and any other preamped finder for that matter, to be checked per MU) is that you need to stick in a whooping +-217 peds to gain access to effective 3,3k drops amped lvl3 and lvl2-equivalent.

    Whereas buying amps (from the begining so to say) for equivalent run would mean circa 2,2k stuck in tt of the amps.

    For this advantage you "pay" effectively something like 5-10 peds per finder, compared to an ideal finder, but compared to Terra series you actually save peds or, at worst, stay even.

  5. #325
    Prowler
    Joined
    Sep 2011
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    England, Nottingshire
    Avatar
    bigdaddy longhairedlover trim
    Society
    Freelancer
    Posts
    1,613
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is no such way as "the one true correct way". That's what I am disputing.
    Theres more than 1 way to skin a cat.

  6. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    .

    What is absolutely fantastic about Dsec30 (and any other preamped finder for that matter, to be checked per MU) is that you need to stick in a whooping +-217 peds to gain access to effective 3,3k drops amped lvl3 and lvl2-equivalent.

    Whereas buying amps (from the begining so to say) for equivalent run would mean circa 2,2k stuck in tt of the amps.

    For this advantage you "pay" effectively something like 5-10 peds per finder, compared to an ideal finder, but compared to Terra series you actually save peds or, at worst, stay even.
    I love the math behind this, while an additional boost could be easily gained with level 8 amps for 106% markup. Sadly it is additive to the claim size instead of multiplicative

  7. #327
    Dominant kingofaces's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    US
    Avatar
    Tony KingofAces Hans
    Posts
    383
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For comparable depth you need to use terra, which amplified with lvl2 would be more expensive, circa 107% for solo enm.

    Asuming finder decay is not recovered into finds,
    asuming Dsec 30 at 160%,
    then

    Dsec 30 "unamped" enmatter solo is 106,3%
    Dsec 30 "unamped" ores solo is 103,2%
    Dsec 30 "unamped" double-drop is 104,3%

    and then trends with the amp toward the MU of the amp, probably D-Class being the best pick from this pov.

    What is absolutely fantastic about Dsec30 (and any other preamped finder for that matter, to be checked per MU) is that you need to stick in a whooping +-217 peds to gain access to effective 3,3k drops amped lvl3 and lvl2-equivalent.

    Whereas buying amps (from the begining so to say) for equivalent run would mean circa 2,2k stuck in tt of the amps.

    For this advantage you "pay" effectively something like 5-10 peds per finder, compared to an ideal finder, but compared to Terra series you actually save peds or, at worst, stay even.
    Edit: I deleted my old post because of double checking the calculations.

    It looks like the differences between your calculations and mine were partly because you included the base probes in the total TT per drop calculation. To make it an amp equivalent MU, you need to subtract out those 20 probes for ore, 10 for enmatter, etc. Otherwise, it would be like saying MU is 102% on a 103% MU amp because you included the finder's base 20 probes for ores. The TT for how you determine MU should be based on what you are adding rather than total probes to compared to actual amp MU. It would be possible to get even more precise by subtracting out a base finder's decay + MU, but I'd have to spend a little time double checking how that would work.

    If I don't include the DSEC 30 finder decay (just finder MU), the MU for enmatter is 104.90%, and 102.45% for ore. If I do include the decay as well as MU, it becomes 106.33% for ore and 112.67% for enmatter.

    In my old calculations before the edit, I didn't include finder decay in the MU because I was trying to partition finder decay compared to other regular finders for other comparisons (pre-amped finders make this really tricky). That's what tripped me up for a bit trying to remember why I did it that way. Including finder decay is more realistic though for the purposes of this conversation.
    Last edited by kingofaces; 10-09-2019 at 04:34.

  8. #328
    Elite Kerham's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    to the moon and back
    Avatar
    Kerawan Kerham Maddahy
    Society
    Project Y
    Posts
    4,728
    Images
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by kingofaces View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To make it an amp equivalent MU
    It is not as much as an amp-equivalent MU, but a comparison between finders. It is not fair to count only the amplification, because MU is also paid for base-cost. Dsec30's base tt decay is 3.96. If you'd look only at the amplification, then is only fair to divie Dsec's decay by 2, and then you'd have a "base, unamped" decay of 1.98 for a depth of 820m. There exists no such thing ingame, even customized 213 has more decay.

    So if I compare two finders, if I compare three finders, six of them even, four amped and two unamped or one preamped, two amped and three unamped, whatever combination I might use, the only valid approach is to calculate overall cost per overall TT turnover (and here with own personal ideology upon wether tt finder is turnover or tax).

    Coming back to our discussion about the tt of the finder and the importance of the hypothesis (parallel to the actual posibility of measurement):

    Presume F212(L) unamped, bought from AH at 120%. Decay 1,343 pec.

    - if tt of finder is ignored:

    per 100 ped mined enmatter, 200 drops, we would care only for 53 PEC, namely MU finder spent

    - if tt of finder is considered a cost, not reimbursed in finds:

    per 100 ped enmatter, 200 drops, we would care for 3,22 PED.

    The main difference between these hypothesis, and where is the core of me disagreeing with tt of finder being a minor nuissance, is the opportunity of amplification. In the "don't care" hypothesis, it adds 2-3% to necessary MU. In the "it's all cost to me" hypothesis, it adds 1-1,4% to necessary MU. In the first hypothesis you can mine wherever. In the second one, you have to be very cautious where you step and what choices you make, because small% add up very fast, particularly (!) on lowest costly activities in absolute values (e.g. unamped enm).
    Last edited by Kerham; 10-09-2019 at 10:22.

  9. #329
    Dominant kingofaces's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    US
    Avatar
    Tony KingofAces Hans
    Posts
    383
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It is not as much as an amp-equivalent MU, but a comparison between finders.
    The important thing is not making apples to oranges comparisons. The way I showed is one way of doing that so you can convert to amp equivalent MU. It depends what you are trying to compare if you put finder decay into that MU calculation because the other aspect is looking at total finder decay in terms of depth too. In my case, I look at F-106 plus enhancer decay because that's normally to cheapest way to get to depth. If you're using the calculations I was, you'd need to pick a baseline unamped finder to subtract out for comparison. Not everyone is going to use the same finder though, which is why I didn't get into that very much, but what you're paying for depth is difficult to combine with pre-amped costs while really making sense of both at once.

    On a side note, once you get past about 700m depth, there's not really a reason to use the other L unamped finders with really high decay (enhanced UL finders are cheaper if you want the few remaining resources not available to you at that point), so that's why I partition a rough baseline finder and the rest goes into "amp" MU rather than an even split.

    The other conversion I mentioned a bit is what you are doing, but you can't compare that to amp MU directly either, which is what had been coming up before. If you're just doing a simple calculation like (Finderdecay*MU+Probecost)/Probecost, you need to do that to your base finder + amp as well to convert it correctly. What people cannot do is do that calculation only for the pre-amped finder and then say compare it to a 103.5% amp directly without considering the base finder. Either approach works depending on what exactly you are trying to compare, but it needs to be consistent is all.

  10. #330
    Elite Kerham's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    to the moon and back
    Avatar
    Kerawan Kerham Maddahy
    Society
    Project Y
    Posts
    4,728
    Images
    59
    Fully agree on the conclusion, most important is building for oneself a coherent and consistent behaviour and system of refference.

Page 33 of 34 FirstFirst ... 23 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Planet Calypso on Twitter  Follow Planet Calypso on Facebook