Developer Notes #14 - Loot 2.0 Update

San said:

I believe at least part of the conflict stems from the fact that it is not unanimous what "fairness" means. It means different things to different people. Some believe it is fair if they were rewarded for having paid copious amounts of money to another player when they bought some rare and highly efficient tool from them. Others believe it is fair if they were rewarded for paying more to MindArk than others did.

Click to expand...

The thing is though, if they implement a cost-based loot distribution rule for team hunting and shared loot, they can correctly implement it so their loot share is adjusted based off of their tool's efficiency, just like if they were hunting solo, so the players with efficient setups get just as much advantage as they, according to MindArk, are entitled to, in a way that does not affect other players.

Loot 1.0 was about being eco and leveraging that advantage and in the process damaging loot on a grand scale, we have moved on from this in Loot 2.0 where the system no longer works this way, and increasing your tool's efficiency still does have an effect on your returns, but the difference is coming from MindArk and not from other players.

This is the model they have chosen they want to pursue, because they believe it to be more balanced, fair, and sustainable.

The issue at hand that we have is with loot sharing not having been properly adjusted to function in this new loot system, and people are trying to fight against having it fixed because they feel it's their right to directly steal PED from players who have lower dpp than them, but it is not. MindArk has made this clear, they just didn't have the foresight to fix this issue before releasing Loot 2.0, likely because they are short staffed, which is the same reason it will probably still be a while until we see them implement a fix for this, despite their acknowledgement of the issue in this thread.

Do skills matter at this Point and, what about mining loot...Is it included as well or, is it a different sort of loot pool output?

Darkaruki said:

The thing is though, if they implement a cost-based loot distribution rule for team hunting and shared loot, they can correctly implement it so their loot share is adjusted based off of their tool's efficiency, just like if they were hunting solo, so the players with efficient setups get just as much advantage as they, according to MindArk, are entitled to, in a way that does not affect other players.

Loot 1.0 was about being eco and leveraging that advantage and in the process damaging loot on a grand scale, we have moved on from this in Loot 2.0 where the system no longer works this way, and increasing your tool's efficiency still does have an effect on your returns, but the difference is coming from MindArk and not from other players.

This is the model they have chosen they want to pursue, because they believe it to be more balanced, fair, and sustainable.

The issue at hand that we have is with loot sharing not having been properly adjusted to function in this new loot system, and people are trying to fight against having it fixed because they feel it's their right to directly steal PED from players who have lower dpp than them, but it is not. MindArk has made this clear, they just didn't have the foresight to fix this issue before releasing Loot 2.0, likely because they are short staffed, which is the same reason it will probably still be a while until we see them implement a fix for this, despite their acknowledgement of the issue in this thread.

Click to expand...

Maybe I don't understand what you are saying and you will have to explain it further.
But as I read it, what you are saying means that for example player 1 and player 2 kills one mob together with a kill cost of exactly 15 ped to kill.
Player one payed 5 ped to kill 50% of it, player two payed 10 ped for the other 50% of it.

The mob loot exactly 100% (15 ped) back.
With the new "fair" system, player one would receive 5 ped return, and player two 10 ped, right?
Where does the gain for player one come for having much higher efficiency than player 2?

Maybe you mean that player one who got 100% efficiency vs player two who got 50%, should player one get loot based on kill cost +3,5% extra due to high efficiency, and in this case make a small profit while player two have a small loss, due to the fact it pays back exactly the kill cost?
Who do you think those 3,5% extra come from if not player 2? The loot return is still 15 ped, exactly what they payed for to kill it.

If we talk DPP and scale it up to 1 person with 3.5 DPP and 99 people with 2.7 DPP average, they all deal 1% damage each on whatever HP mob, the one persons great DPP will not be enough to "hit the limit" for the mob to reach "optimal loot" in regards to MU, so the mob will loot only shrapnel (for example).
Where does the player with great DPP gain anything?
If the mob anyway also would loot 1 ESI or whatever else MU loot, should it automatically go to the one with great DPP, as it seems most fair?

Wouldn't that also mean that everyone in shared loot with low DPP will be stuck with their 95-98% TT return and no chance for markup, and the one with high DPP would be at same TT returns (+the bonus for high efficiency if having one) but with a chance to make profit with markup?
I would rather gamble a bit and also have a chance to hit the MU loot (with low DPP) and make profit due to looting a ESI or whatever, and not be doomed to a loss with no chance for anything else.
But to make it fair, it is the only way it could be, right?

What I tried to point out was that some people seem to feel entitled to a reward for their "investment" which really just was a payment to another player which has no meaning to MindArk. Of course they're scared shitless to lose their edge, it's only natural. Someone may have come to realize that the sheer amounts changing hands for rare pixels are outright insane and such a schism between the haves and have-nots isn't good for the game as a whole. As said, just an idea. Folks have different views of what is "fair" depending on their own position.

San said:

What I tried to point out was that some people seem to feel entitled to a reward for their "investment" which really just was a payment to another player which has no meaning to MindArk. Of course they're scared shitless to lose their edge, it's only natural. Someone may have come to realize that the sheer amounts changing hands for rare pixels are outright insane and such a schism between the haves and have-nots isn't good for the game as a whole. As said, just an idea. Folks have different views of what is "fair" depending on their own position.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, and I've always felt this way. I was around when Imk2's were going for 2k PED and MOD fap's were being duped like it was going out of style. The ridiculous artificial inflation of items rested solely on MA and their inability to properly balance a game for a growing community. It wasn't even an investment in those days, you had the best gear available for a couple hundred dollars.

The "investors" perverted what should have been entertainment into just another way to make a quick buck - with the help of MA of course who conveniently stopped dropping anything worth a damn.

Due to the latest system I've lost somewhere in the range of 10k USD, but I'm not going to thrown a tantrum because something was changed that should have been a decade ago. The game needs to continue down this path if it wants to survive; it should be fair for the majority and not care about a handful of people who really aren't contributing to the success of the company.

Jhereg said:

Probably not unreasonable with a high dpp weapon like IMK2. And most players can use pills/est/crit buffs to get at least halfway there..

My calculations are not meant to be exact, but to demonstrate what is currently the problem with the shared loot mobs.

At 3.1 DPP vs 3.0 DPP, the differential would be closer to 3.2%. But it will exist.

At 7% differential, if the higher dpp can cycle ~1k an hour, they can siphon on average ~35 peds from other player(s) per hour.

Click to expand...

What do u think of this.

So since the loot is based on cost if u go super eco at shared u will get more % tt then u should get. Do you think MA wont balance you in time or you remain with it ?

ChronicDeadEye said:

Couldn't agree more, and I've always felt this way. I was around when Imk2's were going for 2k PED and MOD fap's were being duped like it was going out of style. The ridiculous artificial inflation of items rested solely on MA and their inability to properly balance a game for a growing community. It wasn't even an investment in those days, you had the best gear available for a couple hundred dollars.

The "investors" perverted what should have been entertainment into just another way to make a quick buck - with the help of MA of course who conveniently stopped dropping anything worth a damn.

Due to the latest system I've lost somewhere in the range of 10k USD, but I'm not going to thrown a tantrum because something was changed that should have been a decade ago. The game needs to continue down this path if it wants to survive; it should be fair for the majority and not care about a handful of people who really aren't contributing to the success of the company.

Click to expand...

I agree, more UL gear is badly needed for this game, not everyone can put in 10k dollars on a weapon and blast away.. Lets hope these upgrade missions will balance the game out abit.

Gear should be ALOT cheaper so ppl can have peds to hunt and decay with instead of having gear for all peds.

I mean, you should not need to put in same amount of cash into a game as a new house cost just to play the game.

ProActive Mango said:

I agree, more UL gear is badly needed for this game, not everyone can put in 10k dollars on a weapon and blast away.. Lets hope these upgrade missions will balance the game out abit.

Gear should be ALOT cheaper so ppl can have peds to hunt and decay with instead of having gear for all peds.

I mean, you should not need to put in same amount of cash into a game as a new house cost just to play the game.

Click to expand...

L (too short)

ProActive Mango said:

I agree, more UL gear is badly needed for this game, not everyone can put in 10k dollars on a weapon and blast away.. Lets hope these upgrade missions will balance the game out abit.

Gear should be ALOT cheaper so ppl can have peds to hunt and decay with instead of having gear for all peds.

I mean, you should not need to put in same amount of cash into a game as a new house cost just to play the game.

Click to expand...

I think sportscars in real life should cost the same as a regular family car also. Same with exlusive watches and in general everything. Nothing should be allowed to cost more than average so Everyone can afford it!

Almost forgot. Houses should never cost more than 12months rent so we all can buy them without big loans.

ProActive Mango said:

I agree, more UL gear is badly needed for this game, not everyone can put in 10k dollars on a weapon and blast away.. Lets hope these upgrade missions will balance the game out abit.

Gear should be ALOT cheaper so ppl can have peds to hunt and decay with instead of having gear for all peds.

I mean, you should not need to put in same amount of cash into a game as a new house cost just to play the game.

Click to expand...

The price of gear has actually gone done quite a lot in the last few years, so yeah, this is something they have been working on moving towards just slowly enough not to piss people off who invested in gear too much, which is probably the best way to go about it.

Like minim says in a sarcastic fashion for whatever reason, the very best gear will still come at a steep price, but that only makes sense, most of the low-mid level gear has gotten a lot cheaper though. (ex: adj ep41, adj resto, cdf guns, xent tech, adjmk2 have decimated the pricetags on a huge amount of items)

you are missing my point, it becomes a pyramid game when old school weapons are better than newly dropped gear.

Oldschool weapons that was duplicated to a crazy amount with crazy efficency no longer drops and outperform the newly added weapons and gear.
Old players live of the new players who HAS to buy that gear instead of having a chance of looting similiar gear.
That is the biggest problem and can have serious effect for this game future.


We all know what happens to a pyramid game.

ProActive Mango said:

Old players live of the new players who HAS to buy that gear instead of having a chance of looting similiar gear.
That is the biggest problem and can have serious effect for this game future.

Click to expand...

Most people from that era doesn't play the game anymore and most owners of high end gear have bought it for heavy $$.

Ekholm said:

Most people from that era doesn't play the game anymore and most owners of high end gear have bought it for heavy $$.

Click to expand...

i understand your point but it dont matter if they bought it or not, it still becomes a pyramid game if similar equipment cant be loot anymore.

ProActive Mango said:

you are missing my point, it becomes a pyramid game when old school weapons are better than newly dropped gear.

Oldschool weapons that was duplicated to a crazy amount with crazy efficency no longer drops and outperform the newly added weapons and gear.
Old players live of the new players who HAS to buy that gear instead of having a chance of looting similiar gear.
That is the biggest problem and can have serious effect for this game future.


We all know what happens to a pyramid game.

Click to expand...

Well, a few http://www.entropiawiki.com/Info.aspx?chart=Weapon&id=2273 and http://www.entropiawiki.com/Info.aspx?chart=Weapon&name=Tegretov_TR6_Perfected have dropped within recent years

I think those are fairly competitive with some of the oldschool greats, and I don't see how what I said is missing the point, even low-mid range gear used to be extremely expensive 5-10 years ago, these days the prices are laughable in comparison, and they're continuing to get cheaper slowly because of the stuff MA has implemented

They are definitely working towards trying to make the game more accessible and give non oldschool players opportunities, they just don't want to overdo it because that would risk damaging the trust of players who invested a lot in their gear, I suppose.

They actually did do this with crit recently though, in an effort to move the game away from exactly what you are describing, and it did hurt the trust of a lot of big players in the process, but it was also something that needed to be done to increase fairness in the game.

ProActive Mango said:

i understand your point but it dont matter if they bought it or not, it still becomes a pyramid game if similar equipment cant be loot anymore.

Click to expand...

But then "old players live of the new players who HAS to buy that gear instead" is not true, since both "HAS" to buy that gear.
The difference is that the people who bought the expensive gear have together several million peds tied up in the game where MA can make revenue and what not of just the cash being locked in the game, and on MAs bank account.
You can add 10 000 new players to the game with 1000 ped each in gear, and still wont come up to the sum of all the high end gear people have bound in their gear.


For me a carrot was that I could reach this levels myself one day and have all the best gear and hopefully make a profit from the game.
That carrot is now gone and there is no goal anymore.
Why should I reach level 100+, own the best gear etc if all it brings me is a little smaller loss (but probably more money in the end due to much higher cycle)?

It would be smarter of me to invest in the stock market in this case, take a risk of loosing but have a great chance of making $$ as well.

Yeap, the upgrade missions is a perfect way of moving forward!

and what i mean with old school weapons and there efficency is they bring in more TT loot than regular weapons in the longrun and thats the main problem, ALL weapons should bring in the SAME amount of TT loot, the only DIFFRENCE efficency should do is that YOU loot more loot that has POTENTIAL to earn you MU.
Thats how it should be.

Ekholm said:

The difference is that the people who bought the expensive gear have together several million peds tied up in the game where MA can make revenue and what not of just the cash being locked in the game, and on MAs bank account.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If you buy an expensive item from another player and deposit money to do so, the seller has the money and not MindArk. They may decide to use it up playing or just withdraw. While the money is on MA's accounts in between, it is a liability in their books and not an asset. Only the TT value of that item is tied up in the game and is utilized via decay, which is what MA earns money from. The markup part is off limits to them.

San said:

Not necessarily. If you buy an expensive item from another player and deposit money to do so, the seller has the money and not MindArk. They may decide to use it up playing or just withdraw. While the money is on MA's accounts in between, it is a liability in their books and not an asset. Only the TT value of that item is tied up in the game and is utilized via decay, which is what MA earns money from. The markup part is off limits to them.

Click to expand...

Sure, that is very true.

But still MA will make $ from the fees when you deposit or withdraw.

ProActive Mango said:

old school weapons and there efficency is they bring in more TT loot than regular weapons in the longrun and thats the main problem, ALL weapons should bring in the SAME amount of TT loot, the only DIFFRENCE efficency should do is that YOU loot more loot that has POTENTIAL to earn you MU.
Thats how it should be.

Click to expand...

And this is fueled buy your greed (?) since you don't afford or want to invest in high sums in the game.
You feel you shall have the same chances as someone who does afford/dare to invest a lot and bring much more to the game in term of fees and decay etc.
MA and Entropia is not going to survive when there only is so many people having a turnover of $10-100 a month, as it wont generate enough to keep the game alive with server cost, staff, rent etc etc.

MA controls the TT given to players and if certain gear can make you more TT than others we have a big big problem.

as i said, gear should only effect WHAT you loot and not how much you loot.

Ekholm said:

And this is fueled buy your greed (?) since you don't afford or want to invest in high sums in the game.
You feel you shall have the same chances as someone who does afford/dare to invest a lot and bring much more to the game in term of fees and decay etc.
MA and Entropia is not going to survive when there only is so many people having a turnover of $10-100 a month, as it wont generate enough to keep the game alive with server cost, staff, rent etc etc.

Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with greed or me as a person. And if you fail to see my point than thats on you, not me.

ProActive Mango said:

MA controls the TT given to players and if certain gear can make you more TT than others we have a big big problem.

as i said, gear should only effect WHAT you loot and not how much you loot.

Click to expand...

currently it does both but to a degree that I think is pretty fair, so I'm going to have to disagree here, the game would be pretty boring otherwise.

Ekholm said:

Sure, that is very true.

But still MA will make $ from the fees when you deposit or withdraw.
Same with items loosing in MU value.
If I bought something from you for 250k ped, that you yourself bought for 250k, and you would withdraw it, the money is still in the game, but MA made some cash in their fees both way.
If all of a sudden MA changes something (2.0) and the item is now only worth 50k, MA make a 200k profit+the fees.
And as stated above, most gear have already lost a lot of it's value.



And this is fueled buy your greed (?) since you don't afford or want to invest in high sums in the game.
You feel you shall have the same chances as someone who does afford/dare to invest a lot and bring much more to the game in term of fees and decay etc.
MA and Entropia is not going to survive when there only is so many people having a turnover of $10-100 a month, as it wont generate enough to keep the game alive with server cost, staff, rent etc etc.

Click to expand...

where does MA make 200k when an item loses 200k in value???? that doesnt make any kind of sense.
nobody pays any kind of MU directly to MA apart from upgrade missions or galactica or similar. in all other cases the money remains at the player and its irrelevant how much an item is worth. actually it would be better for MA if that item would have a high value as someone who would want to buy it would need to depo cash and they earn fees.
if an item loses value the player "loses" money. but MA doesnt earn it.

Me Really Never said:

where does MA make 200k when an item loses 200k in value???? that doesnt make any kind of sense.
nobody pays any kind of MU directly to MA apart from upgrade missions or galactica or similar. in all other cases the money remains at the player and its irrelevant how much an item is worth. actually it would be better for MA if that item would have a high value as someone who would want to buy it would need to depo cash and they earn fees.
if an item loses value the player "loses" money. but MA doesnt earn it.

Click to expand...

Seems like I fell down the very same hole as before with my way of thinking

Ekholm said:

Sure, that is very true.

But still MA will make $ from the fees when you deposit or withdraw.
Same with items loosing in MU value.
If I bought something from you for 250k ped, that you yourself bought for 250k, and you would withdraw it, the money is still in the game, but MA made some cash in their fees both way.
If all of a sudden MA changes something (2.0) and the item is now only worth 50k, MA make a 200k profit+the fees.
And as stated above, most gear have already lost a lot of it's value.



And this is fueled buy your greed (?) since you don't afford or want to invest in high sums in the game.
You feel you shall have the same chances as someone who does afford/dare to invest a lot and bring much more to the game in term of fees and decay etc.
MA and Entropia is not going to survive when there only is so many people having a turnover of $10-100 a month, as it wont generate enough to keep the game alive with server cost, staff, rent etc etc.

Click to expand...

That's not how an investment works, and it's not how MA is making money.

If someone bought a gun for 250k PED all that has happened is the PED changes hands. The person who made 250k PED withdraws that money, MA takes a grand total of $250 USD. Trust me, they're not swimming in gold coins due to withdrawl fees. Someone buys the gun later for 50k PED, all that happened is original buyer is out 200k PED. Now he withdraws 50k PED, MA takes $50 USD. For the entire transaction they have made $300 withdrawl fee and another for deposit. (Haven't done a depo in a decade, not sure what that is now)

No where in that scenario did MA ever make $20k USD for an item with a markup the players have created, every PED has been taken out of the game. That would only make sense if MA was the original seller of the item.

You keep calling it 'investing', and it's not. Buying high end items from players is not investing. They have no value to MA at all, and MA actually can claim very little of said "investment" - therefore it's barely a benefit to MA at all unless they can convince players to not withdraw the PED so they can make interest on it. You could call it maybe "risk taking" because you never know if MA will stop dropping items or start dropping better and more eco items while never touching older items and be out 100k PED like myself. (just a drop in the bucket compared to what some of the big ubers have lost)

Of course someone who is hunting punies doesn't 'deserve' to get what someone hunting the biggest mobs in the game does, and they don't. All of the great MU items these days are coming from large creatures and people who have high end gear reap the benefits of this and the mid level players moving forward will provide them with profit. It just has to be on a more reasonable scale or else the viability of this game is incredibly limited when some people can never even hope to reach mid levels without dumping several thousand dollars into an incredibly volatile market.

MA benefits from lower item values because players have limited budgets and the less spent on items the more there is left to churn into MA's account.

I'm a bit confused about the loot system, are the loot always based on the cost of killing the mob and not the mobs itself?

So if I kill a mob and it cost me 10peds of ammo and decay than kill the exaxt same type mob with a cost of 9peds, I will get more loot when I spent 10 peds? or?

billairboy said:

I'm a bit confused about the loot system, are the loot always based on the cost of killing the mob and not the mobs itself?

So if I kill a mob and it cost me 10peds of ammo and decay than kill the exaxt same type mob with a cost of 9peds, I will get more loot when I spent 10 peds? or?

Click to expand...

With loot 2.0 you'll get more shrapnel likely unless you are lucky enough to get something other than shrapnel. Of course if you killed the 10 ped mob without armor and decayed the extra ped in armor and fap on the 9 ped to make up the difference between the 9 and 10 ped mob, paying more on the 9 ped, it could go other way too, at least in theory.

but...

well, lets say everything is all theoretical... so it's hard to really tell what's going on with 100% certainty at all times, as it was with loot 1.0...

All of that said, with loot 1.0 you got more skills sometimes killing the 9 ped vs the 10 ped since you were able to achieve more kills per hour, and reach the skill gains for the 'kill bonus,' if you will. Whether those skills that you chip out and sell are worth more than the decay is unlikely, but for some situations, the skills could be worth more, especially if you are low level now and working on upping those skills to go after something bigger down the road, etc.

billairboy said:

I'm a bit confused about the loot system, are the loot always based on the cost of killing the mob and not the mobs itself?

So if I kill a mob and it cost me 10peds of ammo and decay than kill the exaxt same type mob with a cost of 9peds, I will get more loot when I spent 10 peds? or?

Click to expand...

Short answer is yes, on the same weapon.

This can be seen on a mob to mob basis. If you crit a mob and pay less to kill a specific mob, your cost goes down and your loot average also goes down for that mob.

Jhereg said:

Short answer is yes, on the same weapon.

This can be seen on a mob to mob basis. If you crit a mob and pay less to kill a specific mob, your cost goes down and your loot average also goes down for that mob.

Click to expand...

I thought that I read a post from the MA guy that said crit hits did not affect loot.

Checked around and didn't find the post right off but think about it. If MA counts crit hits then you would lose loot because it would cost less to kill a mob because of the hit. That does not seem right or fair for that matter.

CozMoDan said:

I thought that I read a post from the MA guy that said crit hits did not affect loot.

Checked around and didn't find the post right off but think about it. If MA counts crit hits then you would lose loot because it would cost less to kill a mob because of the hit. That does not seem right or fair for that matter.

Click to expand...

Crit hits has an effect on "average" loot, and it seems to only take away the savings from the crit itself. There is really no detriment to it.