Question: Shadowfire's first question

The economy of EU is based off of resource flow, with a healthy flow being resources being hunters/miners loot resources who sell to crafters which return items to market.

Right now, we are plagued by problems, which stem from three major parts: Volatility/variability, low and inaccurate chance of success, and (L) armor/guns being dropped in hunting(only super rare UL things should)

The 33% chance of success introduces a 3x multiplier to all input costs...mindark's take and markup fees paid alike, turning math of mindarks's 5-10% take into 15-30% over the course of 3 tries at max skills, as it does markup, crushing what crafters can pay, and blowing crafting's cost wide out of the water.
This is also using data from 10k run clicks as the averages.

On the other hand volatility further increases this, where if you do 30 clicks and wind up with 3-5 successes, your effective costs paid to create a single item are doubled.

If you were to dramatically lower the losses on just the crafting system, the entire rest of the game would spring into life as markup would be restored.

Will we see a total redesign of the crafting side of things this year, and will it dramatically reduces the losses and volatility on higher TT blueprints, and how do you plan on going about this? We have seem great changes as of late in the usage of components and proper dilution of higher markup items with lower markup things(ores/nanocubes), where do you plan on going in the next 6-9 months and will planet partners be involved??

The armatrix stuff improved health of the economy, but everyone needs a share and we need interplanetary trade improved badly.

Magnus Eriksson:

Thanks for your feedback. While we are not planning a complete crafting overhaul as you suggest, we do plan to continue developing additional crafted items. Note also that the Armatrix blueprints are universe-wide rather than planet-specific. We have also lowered the overall volatility in crafting and significantly increased average success rates, which changes have had a positive impact on markup.

Psynergy said:

The armatrix stuff improved health of the economy, but everyone needs a share and we need interplanetary trade improved badly.

Click to expand...

I hope you won't mind if I just chip in here with this, because it touches on the closing statement:
https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...s-happy-NOW!&p=3688764&viewfull=1#post3688764

"Please allow planet partners to create their own blueprints with local materials for select classes of existing items (since different blueprints for the same item already have precedents, there should be no technical obstacles).

[...] most prominently the entire range of ArMatrix products. The latter's specific advantage is that because it's all limited, both blueprint and product, the recipes are flexible and can be adapted to market conditions or future developments (which I think was part of their idea from the start). Also since ArMatrix products with their superior efficiency have rendered a large part of existing craftable items on all planets obsolete, the market for locale-specific materials has suffered greatly. This should be addressed.

Another item group where localized blueprints would be not only suitable, but highly desirable, is components for building on landplots. The opportunity was very sadly missed when landplots were introduced on Arkadia."

Henrik|MindArk said:

Magnus Eriksson:

Thanks for your feedback. While we are not planning a complete crafting overhaul as you suggest, we do plan to continue developing additional crafted items. Note also that the Armatrix blueprints are universe-wide rather than planet-specific. We have also lowered the overall volatility in crafting and significantly increased average success rates, which changes have had a positive impact on markup.

Click to expand...

When? When did MindArk lower volatility in crafting and significantly increase average success rate???

Henrik|MindArk said:

Magnus Eriksson:

Thanks for your feedback. While we are not planning a complete crafting overhaul as you suggest, we do plan to continue developing additional crafted items. Note also that the Armatrix blueprints are universe-wide rather than planet-specific. We have also lowered the overall volatility in crafting and significantly increased average success rates, which changes have had a positive impact on markup.

Click to expand...

So these ArMatrix weapons are universe wide, using only resources which are available on all planets. This does nothing to cause trade, and in fact destroys the market for trade in all of the planet individual item categories it feels.

Old items from planet partners have decay : ammo rates that just cannot compete meaning no markup can be sustained.

Do you have plans on releasing blueprints for planet partners that give them back a piece of the pie, so their items can be competative, and able to carry an effective auction markup, too?

Legends said:

When? When did MindArk lower volatility in crafting and significantly increase average success rate???

Click to expand...

Earlier this year they raised it from about 33 to 41 on long term runs for things like components and some other areas, and a few % higher on non-SIB blueprints.

Currently, however, there is quite a bit of volatility on higher input cost items, especially ones that newer players are encouraged to click like the d-class mining amps on RT. People wind up losing all of their money going into new projects without having much of a lead up to it, and in a couple minutes rack up a loss in the 20-100 dollar range.

I do feel it is a responsibility that the game developer needs to take in order to protect their own players. Perhaps encourage newer players to craft something low cost high volume in order to learn the system before they move in to the finished products market?

The finished products market should take more skill than components, in order to encourage people to move at a rate that reflects what is responsible for them to be undertaking.

Henrik|MindArk said:

We have also lowered the overall volatility in crafting

Click to expand...

All i've seen so far is an increase in volatility....

Alukat123 said:

All i've seen so far is an increase in volatility....

Click to expand...

Could you please share some records or logs indiciating this?

Psynergy said:

Could you please share some records or logs indiciating this?

Click to expand...

you mean all the 79-85% return 1+k clicks crafting runs?

Alukat123 said:

you mean all the 79-85% return 1+k clicks crafting runs?

Click to expand...

...I mean can you say link them here so people don't have to go searching? That way it provides effective discussion. It wasn't a criticism, we need to do science here and logic...and in a tight deadline.

I agree strongly that on higher TT blueprints that are lower level and available to newcomers very quickly, it feels horribly wrong to hear time and time again, daily, hourly, that people are losing their $30-60 investments trying to make something mathematically profitable to start their crafting carerer. These people see a very low level blueprint, which they didn't know how rough it was going to be getting the QR of their blueprint up, or how rough doing 10-30 click(what should be a reasonable number on a high TT input blueprint TBH), and the variability screws them horribly.

It turns my stomach, I see it all the time when people blow 300-600 ped in a couple minutes and wind up crying, and I agree with you. We just need the data in this thread now.

I myself am net positive, I would consider myself a competent crafter and there are other things to be taken into account by veteran crafters that help things for us, but for the new comer or someone trying to just do a few clicks in a hurry, oh wow. The variability hurts bad! It's impossible for us to do accurate math on when we're just starting crafting so it scares a lot of people off.

Psynergy said:

...I mean can you say link them here so people don't have to go searching? That way it provides effective discussion. It wasn't a criticism, we need to do science here and logic...and in a tight deadline.

Click to expand...

in - out - % - click amount
Craft1 114,1 91,66 80,33 1630
Craft2 1550,64 1296,12 83,59 923
Craft3 8867,39 7723,28 87,10 6769
Craft4 1760,46 1406,53 79,90 6771
Craft5 5714,08 4735,44 82,87 4024
Craft6 1961,05 1617,03 82,46 2155
Craft7 7217,56 5902,86 81,78 4172

so it can be pretty bad for a long time even on quantity crafting ^^

Base return, without times 10+ multiplier seems to be around 80% for 1k click runs and streaks without 20+ multipliers can be as long as 4,5k clicks.

Quantity crafting was volatility increase.
Condition crafting however, was volatility decrease.

Alukat123 said:

in - out - % - click amount
Craft1 114,1 91,66 80,33 1630
Craft2 1550,64 1296,12 83,59 923
Craft3 8867,39 7723,28 87,10 6769
Craft4 1760,46 1406,53 79,90 6771
Craft5 5714,08 4735,44 82,87 4024
Craft6 1961,05 1617,03 82,46 2155
Craft7 7217,56 5902,86 81,78 4172

so it can be pretty bad for a long time ^^

Click to expand...

Which blueprint, what QR too?

And yes, this is indicative of my own results when I don't do literally 10k tuns, which is insane. When I do higher in the 6-10k range I get a bit closer to craft 3 or a little higher.

It's simply madness to be requiring that for large TT blueprints, which can be 20 ped a click in price. It needs to be scaled down in the variability of when you actually get an item or not so there are more 'eh that run hurt a bit, let me sell these items and start over' versus running the returned mats repeatedly until having nothing but 1-2 items and screaming at the screen and filling chat with refuse... lol We've all seen it a lot, too much.

A 20 ped click is like daplators dying in 4 seconds, seriously that's not okay for this to be available to anyone except the top level when the variability is what it is on high TT click stuff.

The variability is FAR worse on things where you do 10-30 runs, do you have any handy data on that to show Alukat? I have a few of my own runs like this:

Simple I Conductor, (0QR-15QR) RT, Club Neverdie 2019-02-05 11:32:25 quantity 545 runs 381.5 TT input 272.42 TT return 153.9 TT product 30% success -100 peds after sales

If you scale this up to a high cost blueprint and down in runs, it gets down to even 22% or less success for things where you're still cycling a few k peds, from watching other people's data.

People take years to be able to sink 20-50 ped into a mob, much less do it quickly, and to lose the volumes they can before leaving. In crafting on the other hand, you can quickly get into a bad situation and have no way of actually doing math as you're lied to by the system saying it has a 90%-95% chance of success....yet actual product TT is 50% or so, 33-41% success rate long term.

We need to be able to do math, and for variance on high cost short number of click runs to not be so bad if it's available for newer players.

Perhaps have higher level blueprints be more variable, and raise level of EP IV and other high cost blueprints?
Perhaps decrease variability in short number of runs on lower level blueprints?

Maybe even dare to give a non numerical estimation in variability range given the number of click you select to do?(I know that might be a stretch)

Psynergy said:

Which blueprint

Click to expand...

that's crafters secret, sorry ^^

Psynergy said:

what QR too?

Click to expand...

923 one was QR 10-30 , the others QR 60-100...

QR doesn't make much of a difference, QR 100 BPs can be just as bad.
There was one week in december, i think, when i did 1k clicks on QR 100, ended up with ~80%, been thinking, next run has to be good, but that was ~80% return as well.. and it kept going with ~80% untill i was at about 4k clicks...

Psynergy said:

The variability is FAR worse on things where you do 10-30 runs, do you have any handy data on that to show Alukat?

Click to expand...

you mean 10-30 click runs?
lowest return for such small click runs, was 55% return in 13 & 14 click run.
Those ~25% & ~50% return near successes can drag the return down a lot.
Would be good if MA changes the 25% & 50% return near successes to be at least 66% return near successes...

Alukat123 said:

you mean 10-30 click runs?
lowest return for such small click runs, was 55% return in 13 & 14 click run.
Those ~25% & ~50% return near successes can drag the return down a lot.
Would be good if MA changes the 25% & 50% return near successes to be at least 66% return near successes...

Click to expand...

I have had less than 30% returns on 20-30 click runs, L BP maxed on it, crafted on quantitiy.
Even worse on less clicks, did a 16 attempts craft on Quad Wing which was just 1 success, 8 near success and 7 failures (well where is that 95% success rate, I should have with that BP ?).

It evens out if you have many clicks, but normally I dont have enough L BPs to do 1000 clicks on them and even if I would have it, would it make sense to craft 1000 Quad Wings to get an average return out of that L BPs?

For me it looks like HoF or bust, all or nothing, this L BPs is much more a gamble than doing 10k clicks on explo where you get some average returns.

Psynergy said:

...I mean can you say link them here so people don't have to go searching? That way it provides effective discussion. It wasn't a criticism, we need to do science here and logic...and in a tight deadline.

I agree strongly that on higher TT blueprints that are lower level and available to newcomers very quickly, it feels horribly wrong to hear time and time again, daily, hourly, that people are losing their $30-60 investments trying to make something mathematically profitable to start their crafting carerer. These people see a very low level blueprint, which they didn't know how rough it was going to be getting the QR of their blueprint up, or how rough doing 10-30 click(what should be a reasonable number on a high TT input blueprint TBH), and the variability screws them horribly.

It turns my stomach, I see it all the time when people blow 300-600 ped in a couple minutes and wind up crying, and I agree with you. We just need the data in this thread now.

I myself am net positive, I would consider myself a competent crafter and there are other things to be taken into account by veteran crafters that help things for us, but for the new comer or someone trying to just do a few clicks in a hurry, oh wow. The variability hurts bad! It's impossible for us to do accurate math on when we're just starting crafting so it scares a lot of people off.

Click to expand...

No, we are not crazy.
Sample size : 1,122,129.28 PED over about 8 months - pre "improvements" (scroll to bottom to see the end average %)

I get lower average than this now with more skills and better bps and a lot less condition slider runs.

Compare to now and let me know.
Some of us have done this work already and pointed out the facts...
What happens... like in this case, we lose the ability to copy paste the end result to verify the statements they make over time without taking great steps to just verify at a level that satisfies people claiming the small sample sizes.

forgo said:

No, we are not crazy.
Sample size : 1,122,129.28 PED over about 8 months - pre "improvements" (scroll to bottom to see the end average %)

I get lower average than this now with more skills and better bps and a lot less condition slider runs.

Compare to now and let me know.
Some of us have done this work already and pointed out the facts...
What happens... like in this case, we lose the ability to copy paste the end result to verify the statements they make over time without taking great steps to just verify at a level that satisfies people claiming the small sample sizes.

Click to expand...

I'm a large proponent of reduction in volatility, I just wanted it presented in a way likely for it to be read and understood in the time width of this AMA.

I feel it is horrible at the moment when crafting is supposed to be the backbone of the economy. The changes that were made simply were in no way even relevant to most people's click sizes and ped cycles, or even what is remotely possible by the entire economy even!

The return of crafting should be flat out minimum of 80-90% TT return when looking at the short term, 50 clicks, instead of this hof and swirl business over thousands of clicks to 'make back your money with residue' (yeah right, doesn't work) when on quantity.
Rarest resources should be returned first, and no nanocubes or anything without markup returned either.

So many things need balance here it's painful, hopefully changes come...
The item variance needs to come down a huge amount