Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Developer-Notes #12 - Loot-2.0 Follow-Up

M Rufen Power said:
I want these points in bold to be explained, cause to me they do not make any sense...

You say that a higher efficiency rating is best to have, and some attachments minus over-amped will improve the rating, but then you are saying regardless of the eco rating, the lower the cost the better.
Click to expand...

i find it easier to seperate DPP into cost and Efficiency into loot modifier. while they are similar in a way. but keep your costs low and let the efficiency adj that 7%
 
Kerham said:
I am impressed by how many people skipped this line

It is important to note that Optimal Loot only affects loot composition (what you loot), not the loot value (how much you loot).

Aside from that, dear MA, when you introduce this efficiency thing can you please take a look at the parameter with the same name from mining excavators, so the descriptions would be done in same manner and would refer to the same concept?
Click to expand...

Also this

In fact most such kills will meet the requirements for Optimal Loot composition.
Click to expand...

meaning its mostly irrelevent, i had little change to loot make up on cyrene, apart from creature loots been much rarer and i think that'll be fixed in mini VU
 
Antrace said:
so if i pick the
A) A-3 Justifier Mk.II Improved Ancient: 55.9 dps - 3.281 eco
B) DetPil V-Rex 2000, SGA Edition 55.9 dps - 2.812 eco

same damage, same time to kill and same mob hp regen, same defensive costs

with a 1000hp mob
weapon A 3.04 ped to kill
weapon B) 3.55
cost B/cost A = 1.16%

so i expect that cost to kill in loot formula is not directly proportional to loot value
is not linear, or i cant understand sentence " Efficiency paramter influences no more than 7% of total loot value"

Edit: or perhaps is capped... at that 7% ..
Click to expand...

So yeah, I think that since in this case we have a single variable, in the "B" scenario you will get a base loot of 116% compared with the "A" scenario, but then the "A" scenario you will also get a bonus (based on the difference of eco between the two, not more than 7%), so in the "B" scenario will get higher returns (in absolute value) compared with the "A" scenario, but lower than 116% (and higher than 107.88%).

Obviously, that means better return rate (although lower absolute loot value) in the "A" scenario.

Also, obviously, we talk about averages, the base for multipliers which would stand true only with a statistically relevant sample, obviously not like this would happen on each and every mob.
 
Last edited:
Antrace said:
Perhaps someone can help me to hunderstand:

1 Costs are the largest components in loot value calculations.
2 Efficiency inticates the costs of a weapon to create damage
3 Efficiency paramter influences no more than 7% of total loot value

If i have zero costs for healing and armor -->

1+2 = efficiency = costs = largest components in loot value

3 efficiency = 7% of total loot value

3 does not agree with 1+2

thanks
Click to expand...

Hi, absolutely spot on! It's what I wanted to post about as well just from reading the OP, so you beat me to it!

In loot 1.0 I saw that wearing armour compared to none on punies increased my number of low multis to take me above 100% pure kill cost, but still below 100% when considering the then additional armour repair. Along with other observations it made me believe there was some kind of cost 'tracker' in the background, which other people also say compensated partially for using uneco weaps etc. This is not the same as having a personal loot pool - clever wording by MA I think when they denied that such a thing existed...

Anyway, if MA are being only semi-truthful once again, (i.e. yes, literally the truth, but not the whole truth), then the parameter itself may be included in the equation at a max of 7%, but then again the components of the parameter are included again on their own, i.e. pure cost to kill the mob is one value, the efficiency calculation is a related, but sepatate one.
 
DoA said:
So yeah, I think that since in this case we have a single variable, in the "B" scenario you will get a base loot of 116% compared with the "A" scenario, but then the "A" scenario you will also get a bonus (based on the difference of eco between the two, not more than 7%), so in the "B" scenario will get higher returns (in absolute value) compared with the "A" scenario, but lower than 116% (and higher than 107.88%).
Click to expand...

No. 116% value itself is wrong to begin with. You cannot include it twice, if you also talk about 7%. Or I misunderstood smth?

Bah sry, read in a haste first time, actually I agree with you.
 
jetsina said:
Anyway, if MA are being only semi-truthful once again, (i.e. yes, literally the truth, but not the whole truth), then the parameter itself may be included in the equation at a max of 7%, but then again the components of the parameter are included again on their own, i.e. pure cost to kill the mob is one value, the efficiency calculation is a related, but sepatate one.
Click to expand...

There has to be a certain threshold as a mean to control the economy of hunting, aside from pure supply of various stuff.
 
Antrace said:
so if i pick the
A) A-3 Justifier Mk.II Improved Ancient: 55.9 dps - 3.281 eco
B) DetPil V-Rex 2000, SGA Edition 55.9 dps - 2.812 eco

same damage, same time to kill and same mob hp regen, same defensive costs

with a 1000hp mob
weapon A 3.04 ped to kill
weapon B) 3.55
cost B/cost A = 1.16%

so i expect that cost to kill in loot formula is not directly proportional to loot value
is not linear, or i cant understand sentence " Efficiency paramter influences no more than 7% of total loot value"

Edit: or perhaps is capped... at that 7% ..
Click to expand...

i quote myself :D

i'm thinking with u so don't blame me if i write something badly wrong.

i think that at least there is a cap on cost to kill..

in other words, if i use weapon B i pay 16% more to kill the mob but i'll see in the loot value a max of +7%.
 
Kerham said:
There has to be a certain threshold as a mean to control the economy of hunting, aside from pure supply of various stuff.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by threshold as control.
Put another way then - on doing 1000 hp damage I expect the base calculation to be at 3dpp, so a loot of 3.33 peds. What I used to see in fact (on 300hp mobs) was basic loots up to 120%, but obviously lots of nothing too (no-looter/frags). My non-multi return was consistantly close to 50% - it was multis which dictated whether or not I got a profit from the run.

If this was the baseline control, then you quite simply had to use above 3.0 dpp to profit in the long run. Other compensations for inefficiency were always less than 100%, so MA knows it is still statistically safe.

The problem is getting to know what we have now. We need a range of tests.
The only thing I know so far is that using the new (L) weaps and amped, for the first time I have a combo which appears to be at very close to 3dpp and my cost to kill arg youngs is indeed 1 ped instead of 1.04 or 1.05.
I don't yet know if the loot is going to stay the same value long-term as before... (based on still having done 300hp damage, with minimal regen).

I have a feeling that MA's statement is the wrong way of looking at things once again. Cost to kill is not the absolute factor on which loot is based, but hp inflicted on the mob.
 
Last edited:
Antrace said:
in other words, if i use weapon B i pay 16% more to kill the mob but i'll see in the loot value a max of +7%.
Click to expand...

The way I read it is that the efficiency factor would represent the difference between eco and uneco hunting.

As in we'll all get loot proportional with what we spend, and that max 7% would only mean that the efficient, eco hunters will not get results better with more than 7% then an inefficient hunter.

Imagine it as something like that (oversimplified of course): let's say MAs rake is 2% (like in a casino) and the average loot return is 98%, then:
- the average hunter will get the average loot return, so 98% of what he spent (not of an average value per mob)
- the most efficient hunter will get up to 101.5% (98% + 7%/2) of what he spent (not of an average value per mob)
- the least efficient, reckless hunter will get at least 94.5% (98% - 7%/2) of what he spent (not of an average value per mob)
- so the difference between least and most efficient hunter is 7% at most (101.5% - 94.5%)

I suspect said margin was higher than 7% before.

So by being more efficient, you'll still get better return rates, but there is only so much better that you can get to (7%).

As said, this is a gross oversimplification, for example not taking into account at all the proportionality of hunters of various efficiency or other additional things/costs, but I think is correct enough to explain the concept.
 
Bertha Bot said:
[h=2]Developer Notes #12 - Loot 2.0 Follow-Up[/h] This installment of Developer Notes attempts to clear up some of the questions and misconceptions related to the Version Update 15.15.0 - Loot 2.0.

Economy Parameter (soon to be renamed Efficiency)

[*]The largest components by far in loot value calculations are costs, such as weapon deterioration, ammo consumption, armor deterioration, healing costs, etc.
[*]The Efficiency parameter is a relatively small component in loot calculations (no more than 7% of total loot value).

Optimal Loot
Another feature of Loot 2.0 that has sparked lots of discussion and speculation is Optimal Loot.

It is important to note that Optimal Loot only affects loot composition (what you loot), not the loot value (how much you loot). There is no Optimal Loot penalty for hunting creatures that are well below your avatar’s level; in fact most such kills will meet the requirements for Optimal Loot composition.

To best achieve Optimal Loot:
  • Be sure to have the Hit Ability and Damage profession requirements maxed (10.0/10.0) on the weapon your avatar is using.
  • Avoid over-amping (using a weapon amplifier that adds more than 50% of the maximum damage of the weapon to which it is equipped).
  • Minimize healing costs and the need to interrupt damage dealing to heal.
In general, the lower the cost to kill a creature, the higher the proportion of loot composition will be Optimal Loot. There is no inherent “kill timer” for each creature; Optimal Loot is calculated based on costs, not on time.
Click to expand...

So to summarize, there is quality of loot and quantity of loot.

Quantity of Loot will be dependant on weapon deterioration, ammo consumption, armor deterioration, healing costs, etc.

Efficiency basically does lower the ammo and weapon deterioration but from the 7% statement to me that means that given the buffs etc these days, the weapon itself forms a lower % (insignificant) contribution. So say those weapons from 50-60 eco/eff rating basically will have little to no effect at all in terms of % return.

Quality of Loot or Optimal loot which you say is separate, however i see it as a function of the quantity parameter itself. Quality will be good if quantity of loot as a % is high, aka being highly efficient in your hunting style.

Not clear on the minimize healing cost. The way i read it is that regen will be penalised badly only in terms of quality of loot, not the quantity but i am guessing quantity will also be affected as with regen cost of killing the mob increases as well.


Bertha Bot said:
Crafting, Resources and Economy
MindArk is working on restructuring and streamlining the item situation in Entropia Universe. This involves many changes to the crafting system and loot distribution, with the goal of reducing the number of components, resources and similar items in the universe, to ensure that the majority of items have a place within the economy.

The balance between looted and crafted items, along with items from other sources such as events, competitions, strongboxes, etc., will be improved to strike a better balance.

New blueprints will use existing components and resources as much as possible to sustain a thriving and interdependent economy between crafting, mining and hunting.


Originally Posted Here
Click to expand...

I am very happy that this is being worked on and i think it is critical to overhaul the system to make crafting indispensable to all other professions and vice versa.


Observation : Since decay and not mu goes into loot quality evaluation, is it safe to say that the L weapons with high efficiency ( provided everything else remains same) will result in better loot quality then the UL counterparts. (The logic being mu part of L cannot be taken into calculating loot quality). This will be a boost to the crafting and a much needed one may i say so.

Overall good communication and good work MA. Keep it up.
 
DoA said:
example (fake number): kill a mob with a 10 PED cost and you will get 9 PED loot (90%); kill same mob with a 8 PED cost (for example by avoiding regen) and you will get 7.5 PED loot (93.75%) - 9 > 7.5, but 90% < 93.75%
Click to expand...

Doesn't explain why about 30 Osseocollum killed had no more than 5 ped in loot, the vast majority being 1 to 2 peds, hell, one was 90 pec.

MA can write what the hell they wanna write, doesn't change the facts that loot's still gorfed to hell.
 
StarGlider said:
30 Osseocollum killed
Click to expand...

Actually, that explains it very well.

Sure, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but personally I disregard any opinion not based on a statistically relevant sample.
 
Here we go again with sample sizes.

If I carried on, killing more (ie chasing a global or a hof) just to break even, when the 1st round of mobs are looting on average 2 ped, I do not suddenly think I'll see them looting little by little better over time.

I swear the next person who says sample size needs to be higher, is gonna get a boot up the bum :)

Also says nothing of the Goki wave boss, I pumped 80 ped in, died once, and got 17 ped in loot back, with 6 or 7 other people last week.
 
DoA said:
The way I read it is that the efficiency factor would represent the difference between eco and uneco hunting.
Click to expand...

Very good post indeed! :yay: It is the sort of logic I'd try and implement, I think, but the question is how the horse pulls the cart and not the cart the horse.
What is the definition of 100% efficiency, by the way now? Is the RDI energy amp the closest we have to 100% to calculate it from?
Or, another way, what is the break-even point at least in terms of this efficiency factor? Is it 66.7%
 
Kerham said:
I am impressed by how many people skipped this line

It is important to note that Optimal Loot only affects loot composition (what you loot), not the loot value (how much you loot).
Click to expand...

It will take a lot more repetition. If this doesn't help, measures may need to escalate through various stages of Clockwork Orange style sessions up to maybe hammers on toenails.
 
Antrace said:
so if i pick the
A) A-3 Justifier Mk.II Improved Ancient: 55.9 dps - 3.281 eco
B) DetPil V-Rex 2000, SGA Edition 55.9 dps - 2.812 eco

same damage, same time to kill and same mob hp regen, same defensive costs

with a 1000hp mob
weapon A 3.04 ped to kill
weapon B) 3.55
cost B/cost A = 1.16%

so i expect that cost to kill in loot formula is not directly proportional to loot value
is not linear, or i cant understand sentence " Efficiency paramter influences no more than 7% of total loot value"
Click to expand...

The same will not be applicable in real time hunting as for a mob with 1000 hp there is a big chance of high overkill resulting in high cost with vrex2ksga compared to imk2 on any statistically relevant sample size.
 
jetsina said:
Very good post indeed! :yay: It is the sort of logic I'd try and implement, I think, but the question is how the horse pulls the cart and not the cart the horse.
What is the definition of 100% efficiency, by the way now? Is the RDI energy amp the closest we have to 100% to calculate it from?
Or, another way, what is the break-even point at least in terms of this efficiency factor? Is it 66.7%
Click to expand...

I doubt it ever is or was linear or based on a fixed amount.

Think we're just comparing our own efficiency with the efficiency of the average hunter (eventually with the average hunter hunting the same mob) and that is obviously a variable, not a constant.

Anyway, if previously you based your estimation on the DPP (or a 3.0 DPP more exactly as I think you previously mention) you can just translate that back in the new efficiency rating if that suits you since we already have the formulas.

eco rating = 11.5*(max_dmg/cost)^2!- 44*max_dmg/cost + 41.9
combined_Eco=(sum [cost(x)*eco(x)])/(sum(cost(n))

Personally, though I will not try to compare myself with a fixed value (which probably wouldn't be true anyway), but just go with the general principle of "trying to increase my efficiency as much as possible and it is what it is".
 
StarGlider said:
Here we go again with sample sizes.

If I carried on, killing more (ie chasing a global or a hof) just to break even, when the 1st round of mobs are looting on average 2 ped, I do not suddenly think I'll see them looting little by little better over time.

I swear the next person who says sample size needs to be higher, is gonna get a boot up the bum :)

Also says nothing of the Goki wave boss, I pumped 80 ped in, died once, and got 17 ped in loot back, with 6 or 7 other people last week.
Click to expand...

Well, it is a fact that, without (the big) multipliers, returns would be low (looking at different sources estimations vary between ~50% and ~80%) and that's exactly why we need a statistically relevant sample, because otherwise, returns would be terribly low (without said multipliers) or amazingly good (if you get one such multiplier in a small sample).

Hope that makes sense, otherwise please just use a softer boot. :p
 
Oh, and another thing - when I have lots of misses on a mob, my cost to kill that mob was higher, but I've never seen a general effect of higher loot on those (as long as regen is very low). I used to see that regen was at least partially considered, yes!
So it is unlikely that the cost to kill any one particular mob is directly used in the loot equation. How much damage you did to it (not overkill), yes. I still think we have to look for a generic baseline for, say, 30 hp damage, 300, or whatever.

Is there a fast regen but low hp mob on caly that we can kill in highish numbers but while tracking approximately how much regen we allowed them?
 
DoA said:
They're two different things.

First, is calculated the loot value (in terms of TT value) and there the efficiency has a role in formula (up to 7%)

Then, once the value of the loot was determined, is calculated the composition of loot (so either optimal loot or just shrapnel); there efficiency no longer has any role and only cost to kill is taken into consideration.
Click to expand...

Okay so high efficiency = higher quantity of loot. That is fine and I get that. Then after efficiency loot then gets composed, so optimal loot is other than shrapnel being looted. Okay. So what you are saying is similar to what Deth Divinity is saying quoted below. That is fine and I appreciate that.

Divinity said:
So to summarize, there is quality of loot and quantity of loot.

Quantity of Loot will be dependant on weapon deterioration, ammo consumption, armor deterioration, healing costs, etc.

Efficiency basically does lower the ammo and weapon deterioration but from the 7% statement to me that means that given the buffs etc these days, the weapon itself forms a lower % (insignificant) contribution. So say those weapons from 50-60 eco/eff rating basically will have little to no effect at all in terms of % return.

Quality of Loot or Optimal loot which you say is separate, however i see it as a function of the quantity parameter itself. Quality will be good if quantity of loot as a % is high, aka being highly efficient in your hunting style.

Not clear on the minimize healing cost. The way i read it is that regen will be penalised badly only in terms of quality of loot, not the quantity but i am guessing quantity will also be affected as with regen cost of killing the mob increases as well.
Click to expand...

Now this is my issue with this statement, and I will try to both explain and reason it out.


I totally understand what you are both saying, now this is my issue with MA said statement.


My efficiency with current setup is not only producing more TT (QUANTITY) but also is generating more (QUALITY) at the same time, even though cost to kill is 13.43% (HIGHER).

That is what I am not understanding, cause if their statement was true and the facts are the same as they have always been with some tweaks taken into considerations with loot composition, then I would not mind it at all.

So how on calypso I am able to generate more TT and MU with cost to kill is increased is hard to fathom, and before this VU the mob I am speaking about generated less markup loots without the additional efficiency being added to my setup. Unless of course decay is being factored in a more major way than before, which then begs me to question MA's statements to some degree.

I hope I have explained my situation clearly and someone can answer me.
 
Last edited:
sbi said:
"Weapons that have scopes, lasers or amplifiers attached will display a modified Efficiency value (in orange)."

I see the orange but not the effect on the efficiency?
Click to expand...

Tried attaching them to unmaxed weapon and saw a change but none on my maxed weapon as far as I could see.
 
DoA said:
Well, it is a fact that, without (the big) multipliers, returns would be low (looking at different sources estimations vary between ~50% and ~80%) and that's exactly why we need a statistically relevant sample, because otherwise, returns would be terribly low (without said multipliers) or amazingly good (if you get one such multiplier in a small sample).

Hope that makes sense, otherwise please just use a softer boot. :p
Click to expand...

So what Loot 2 really means then, loot will improve significantly, but only if you kill 1000 or so, but if your loots still 50% to 80%, don't worry, do another 1000, and in 1 of those mobs, you'll get the improved loot, the other 999 will still be crap.

So, we agreed then it's not on a per mob basis.

I'd also like to know what gun, except Marco's, that can kill an Osseo for mm, lets say 1 ped.
Most of my loot was between 1 to 2 ped, and I am unable to kill them for 2.10 ped lets say.
 
Last edited:
Vagrant said:
Tried attaching them to unmaxed weapon and saw a change but none on my maxed weapon as far as I could see.
Click to expand...

You are not using the right attachments. Attachments that well exceed your gun+amp efficiency rating creates a higher avg.

So Chon + A101 = 64.8% with attachments at the 83% mark, u get 66.9% new rating, with each attachments increasing the efficiency by a factor of 0.7%.

Of course over-amping could have achieved a similar result, however that's been debunked now and I am sure whoever is manipulating the laser amp market will gladly suffer for their deeds.

However scopes and sights are a different ball game and do have some minor benefit but its a benefit non the less. So until that gets addressed I will continue to test with my setup.
 
xian said:
Thanks for claryfying this.


Interesting. Conforts my fucked up loot theories.
Click to expand...

Piotr said:
Now im 100% sure that 2.0 is either extremely volatile or simply bugged (tt return wise)
Click to expand...

Same here. I observe a significant drop in return rate % tt wise ( >10%) after more than 20k ped cycled.
My defense costs are like 0.3% like before 2.0
Something strange is going on.
 
StarGlider said:
So, we agreed then it's not on a per mob basis.
Click to expand...

It is on a per mob basis, just not on every mob basis.

In order to can have globals and HOFs on some mobs (so a [much] higher loot than cost to kill) is obvious that on (most) other mobs you will have less loot than the cost to kill... otherwise where the PEDs for globals and HOFs would come from?
 
jetsina said:
Oh, and another thing - when I have lots of misses on a mob, my cost to kill that mob was higher, but I've never seen a general effect of higher loot on those (as long as regen is very low). I used to see that regen was at least partially considered, yes!
So it is unlikely that the cost to kill any one particular mob is directly used in the loot equation. How much damage you did to it (not overkill), yes. I still think we have to look for a generic baseline for, say, 30 hp damage, 300, or whatever.

Is there a fast regen but low hp mob on caly that we can kill in highish numbers but while tracking approximately how much regen we allowed them?
Click to expand...

not on caly but check the turrelion Sea wraiths out on cyrene, 10hp with 10hp regen
 
Ive not been on so much and havent been doing propper tests but i have an observation.
Before an standard prot run 3600 ped worth needed 1350 ped worth of global-loot for breakeven.
Yesterday an 1250 global-loot run resulted in a 600 ped loss.
Mobs kill too global ratio seems too be about the same but value on both normal hofs and normal globals are alot lower while the avarage loot from a non multiplier prot is way lower.
Either they are bugged/forgot too add all ammo loot or they just turned the variance waay up (~500 ped less non multiplier loot/ ~400 mobs = 1.25 ped) .

Avarage on the young-old my killcost would be 9 ped and losing 1.25 ped yields a 14% worse TT return then pre 2.0.

So either there are 14% more TT loot in a hof pile, basicly making the game totaly unplayable for the 98% since the hard grinders will pick up most hofs or MAs returns are bugged and components in the loot are missing.

Extra info
Had minis in both runs as well.
My gear 7% fb 116% added crit, maxed imk2+ hyper
0 defence costs.
I can do runs like this for almost any mob.
As far as loss on run 600 ped is not unusall on prots but this was a decent run global wise hate too see returns on the 0 globals ones
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DoA
I'm personally benefiting from the perceived value of sights and scopes to increase economy rating (or I would be if I could get in game to restock my shops) but this seems dodgy as hell to me.

These attachments only have limited capability to affect your cost to kill. For most people, most of their shooting ends up pretty short range unless the mob is slow so the ranged-based skill bonus is usually minimal or non-existent. I would actually argue that cost to kill is increased, owing to increased decay for no increased damage.

I think it''s probably better in invest in gear that increase crits or decrease decay.

Also sometimes cost to kill is more effectively minimised by increasing dps at the cost of reduced dpp - to minimise total regen, and I wonder how that will translate to TT return and "optimal loot" in the new system.

I'm still pondering defensive costs. In the old system I would minimise armour as long as I could survive a hit and use a good fap as fap heals per pec were significantly higher than armour protect per pec. (I use the middle resto chip). But now with the note that defense cost contributes to TT loot value and armour decay cost reduced I am wondering if it makes sense to overprotect, so that I waste minimal time switching to and from fap. I think I read that there is now not a minimum decay based on total protection offered by the armour, so I am not seeing any disadvantage to wearing the biggest armour that I have skills for.
I think faps are likely to plummet in value as MA finishes introducing the armour related changes.
 
DoA said:
It is on a per mob basis, just not on every mob basis.

In order to can have globals and HOFs on some mobs (so a [much] higher loot than cost to kill) is obvious that on (most) other mobs you will have less loot than the cost to kill... otherwise where the PEDs for globals and HOFs would come from?
Click to expand...

Your explaining the old loot system.

Please link the post MA have said this please.

Less loot, to make up for global's /hof's.
I cannot find where they said with improved loot 2, you'd be paying for these globals with less than 50% returns for an hour.
 
StarGlider said:
Your explaining the old loot system.
Click to expand...

I assume the general concept was and still is the same: without multipliers your returns will be considerably lower than the average returns (so the multipliers can build up).

So is not about new or old loot system; in a system where you have an average and you have peaks (multipliers) you automatically must also have drops to compensate for said peaks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top