The Too Big Amp Test

[JohnCapital]

I'll be the first to admit this may be a complete coincidence. However, I'll let you decide for yourself.

Amps are set so that they can do no more than 50% dmg. of the gun it's attached to. I.E. a gun that does 100 dmg. should use an amp that does no more than 50. Anything bigger, and you get no extra dmg. The thought is that the excess decay will be lost.

So let's test that.

Test: Small foul hunt on TI using Opalo SGA w/ two A104 amps


Opalo top dmg = 8, so any amp dmg above 4 is lost. (A104 does 14 dmg. losing 10 dmg. every shot.)
6-12 dmg/shot vs 5.5-11 for typical Opao+A101


Results:
gun+amps cost = 78.36
ammo = 114.18 (exactly enough for 1,903 shots w/ each amp, or 3,806 total shots)
gun+amps+ammo = 192.54


Armor decay (unplated kobold, no fap) = 1.62


TT loot = 172.13 (89.4% return vs. weapon costs)


For the number jugglers:

Lost 20.41 TT vs. weapon cost. Well below any expected TT loss from excess amping.

Total foul killed: 283 (mission counter start=90 end=373)
192.54/283 = Avg. 0.68 weapon spend/foul
172.13/283 = Avg. 0.61 TT loot/foul
1.62/283 = Avg. 0.0057 defense cost/foul
3,806 shots/283 killed = 13.44 avg. shots/mob
Round to 14 shots/mob = 0.05059x14=0.70/mob

Most were youngs. Perhaps 2% were adult/scout

4% LA tax means pretax loot = 172.13/0.96 = 179.30 true TT looted
179.30 true loot / 192.54 cost = 93.12% True return vs weapon cost

Theoretical cost of opalo+A101 to kill 283 foul youngs (100 health)
avg. dmg: 11*.75 = 8.25
100 health / 8.25= 12.12 shots x 1.1 (10% miss) = 13.33 shots round to 14 shots/young (basically same # of shots as A104 setup)
14 shots @ 0.02672/shot = 0.37408 cost/kill
0.37408 cost/kill x 283 kills = 105.87 total weapon cost
105.87 x 89.4% return = 94.65 expected TT loot

Actual loot exceed typical by 172.13/94.65=181.86%
Actual weapon cost exceed typical by 192.54/105.87=181.86%
(Since I used same % return, this isn't as amazing as it looks)

Feel free to check my numbers. I may have made a mistake somewhere.

Yes, it's only one test, and yes it could have been a coincidence. Try it yourself.

 

[Mordrell]

Very interesting it would be nice to see a bigger experiment... aka more runs to see if this wasn't just a lucky run. Soc m8 of mine over-amped his gun recently to see if the extra decay would translate into faster tiering... not sure if it worked though

 

[jjmatrix]

I used to hunt with Mann MPH (4 dmg) +101(3dmg) every now and then; I've never seen anything out of the ordinary, but I have to admit that it's just "gut feeling"... I didn't write down the numbers.

I will do so next time.

 

[PrinceYumil]

If this was true all the omegaton amps would be worthless...just use the e-amps since you'll get the extra decay back in loot

 

[Futurama]

Could you do a full amp run of lets say Svempa s60 and dante? Or something along those lines?

 

[kebplay]

I've been using a Dante on CB24s, it's just one dmg over half the CB24s max of 60. You get the yellow text saying you are over amped but its actually slightly more eco than a Beast (0.33%) and a lot more damage per sec:
CB24/Beast 47.5 dmg/sec
CB24/Dante 54.1 dmg/sec

 

[PrinceYumil]

Yeah there are a couple other guns where you should use a too big amp (Brody+Beast, Riker UL1+A103 off the top of my head).

 

[Leaf Arwen]

AS 147-ME + Dante, works like a charm.

/Arwen

 

[DoubleWolf]

VERY interesting results. Need some more testing to see if this is common, but if so, then damage done really doesn't mean much, and it's more about offensive decay.

Compare this with Grave Digger's experiment (https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/hunting/132137-grave-digger-got-bored.html) which is kind of the opposite of this idea.

It would seem to appear that offensive costs are taken into account, as long as they are being shot into a mob. I would assume that firing 500 ped into the moon and then shooting mobs wouldn't improve your loot at all.

Likewise, firing into a mob and not looting it is also bad, which would follow Jimmy B's tests (https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/hunting/101842-some-utterly-insane-tests.html)

The answer is somewhere in here...

 

[CyberPunk]

Compare this with Grave Digger's experiment (https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/hunting/132137-grave-digger-got-bored.html) which is kind of the opposite of this idea.

Likewise, firing into a mob and not looting it is also bad, which would follow Jimmy B's tests (https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/hunting/101842-some-utterly-insane-tests.html)

Any tests of dumping ammo into mobs other people are looting? Like doing 30% damage for someone while not teamed with them....

 

[PrinceYumil]

Sorry but I don't buy this at all, I mean what's the point of MA taking this extra step when it is much more plausible that loot size is dependent only on the mob? If it is dependent on how much decay/ammo you burn when shooting something, that completely destroys the concept of economical hunting. What's the point when it means you'll get less loot? For that matter it would make damage professions and skills utterly worthless; as long as you're hitting the mob, the extra decay and ammo would go into your own personal loot pool. There is no reason for MA to operate like this. Use some common sense.

Well if anyone still believes it then try shooting up snables with an uber PVP gun and amp and see what kind of loot you get

 

[Oracle]

Any tests of dumping ammo into mobs other people are looting? Like doing 30% damage for someone while not teamed with them....

Probably a lot of anecdotal thoughts on Main Team hunters benefiting from damage-reducing support people in the WoF.

But those hunters are bound to loot more, presumably, as they've put less ammo into the mob to kill it and possibly taken less armour and fap decay.

 

[CyberPunk]

Probably a lot of anecdotal thoughts on Main Team hunters benefiting from damage-reducing support people in the WoF.

But those hunters are bound to loot more, presumably, as they've put less ammo into the mob to kill it and possibly taken less armour and fap decay.

I'm more curious about the support members, dumping lots of ped with no loot.

Afterwards, do the get lots of globals? Does it fill their loot pool?

 

[Wolverine Queen]

I'm more curious about the support members, dumping lots of ped with no loot.

Afterwards, do the get lots of globals? Does it fill their loot pool?

I have thought about this, if there really is some personal loot pool that averages your returns over time, this should definetely fill the loot pool for you...

 

[xWandererx]

AS 147-ME + Dante, works like a charm.

/Arwen

Agreed an u only lose 3.0 overall 2.7 crit an .3 hitability.........

 

[Legion]

I have thought about this, if there really is some personal loot pool that averages your returns over time, this should definetely fill the loot pool for you...

what i noticed is depo a shitload like atleast 100$ = get loads of globals. Happends to me every time i depo, if i dont depo a bit less globals.

 

[sitram]

what i noticed is depo a shitload like atleast 100$ = get loads of globals. Happends to me every time i depo, if i dont depo a bit less globals.

You should follow Legion's theory and you won't have this problem anymore as skills show you where the bigger then average loots are













you're Legion, nvm

 

[khaos]

what i noticed is depo a shitload like atleast 100$ = get loads of globals. Happends to me every time i depo, if i dont depo a bit less globals.

And still you claim you don't have enough money for your 'tests'.

btw. Nice test John

 

[Oracle]

I'm more curious about the support members, dumping lots of ped with no loot.

Afterwards, do the get lots of globals? Does it fill their loot pool?

Hmm...interesting question but can't remember my own experience on this I'm afraid (though I did get my Oculus uber hof during the WoF in which I did some damage reduction, probably just coincidental though).

 

[Legion]

And still you claim you don't have enough money for your 'tests'.

btw. Nice test John

if you read my mining theory you would know i need 7kish peds to make a proper test, and i get ~8k ped in student allowance so no i do have to pay rent etc so cant afford it.

I am doing some hunting tests at the moment though

 

[Kitten]

Its very interesting anyhow I will have to add to that test sometime I need to do the foul missions anyhow hehe

 

[DoubleWolf]

what i noticed is depo a shitload like atleast 100$ = get loads of globals. Happends to me every time i depo, if i dont depo a bit less globals.

Probably because you spend a lot more after your $100 deposit, and cut back when you're not trying to deposit... more ped cycling vs less ped cycling

 

[DoubleWolf]

Sorry but I don't buy this at all, I mean what's the point of MA taking this extra step when it is much more plausible that loot size is dependent only on the mob? If it is dependent on how much decay/ammo you burn when shooting something, that completely destroys the concept of economical hunting. What's the point when it means you'll get less loot? For that matter it would make damage professions and skills utterly worthless; as long as you're hitting the mob, the extra decay and ammo would go into your own personal loot pool. There is no reason for MA to operate like this. Use some common sense.

Ok, I got more threads for you:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/hunting/176428-5-different-weapons-against-argos-test.html

It hasn't been updated in awhile so it only got through 4 weapons. 2 maxed L weapons and 2 unmaxed UL weapons. Looking at the results from the loot however, you can't really conclude that hunting eco is really much better than hunting uneco.

All eco does is reduce your cost to kill a mob. But it says absolutely nothing about the loot you get in return. I wouldn't go so far to say it makes no sense for MA to operate like this.

I don't believe in personal loot pools in that the money is set aside for you, waiting to be claimed, but that by spending more, you give yourself access to better loots from the overall loot pool. But on average never able to receive more than you spent, keeping you at a negative TT return rate. (uber loots are the exception, but these are funded partly by everyone's losses and are independent of your own spending)

If you look in this thread (https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...ibution-did-not-change-according-mindark.html) you will find a message from support where they talk about return calculated as a percentage. So they do calculate it. But is it on a player to player average or the entire economy as a whole? I guess that's up to you to decide...

Back a little more on topic, a test I would really like to see is either someone shooting a mob's health almost all the way down and letting it regen 3 or 4 times, then loot it. Do this a bunch of times and see if the average loot is actually better. Has this ever truly been tested?

It'd be cool to have a second person (not in team) do this then having the first person come in and kill it, but there's that rule that the person that has done the most damage to the mob claims it. That fact could lead you to a few conclusions too.... hmmmm...

 

[PrinceYumil]

Thanks for linking that test thread. I am skeptical of that guy's posted results though because his decay totals do not add up, at least for the Breer P5a which is the only one I've calculated so far.

The a104 amp decays 0.02039 peds and the gun decays 0.00938 peds per shot. His stated amp decay was 427.9, meaning he used it 20,986 times. His stated gun decay was 203.19, which would be 21,662 shots.

Okay, so maybe he forgot to repair the amp one time and it broke during one of the runs and he kept shooting another 676 times. But going by his gun decay, 21,662 shots at 9 pecs of ammo per shot is only 1949.58 peds of ammo spend, while he claimed 2020 peds. So that's an extra 70 peds he charged. I haven't calculated decay for his other weapons but I will do that later.

EDIT: For the Korss, he used his amp 23,495 times and his gun 23,492 times. That's close enough for the difference to be negligible and disregarded. But with the Korss using 8 ammo per shot, that's only 1879.36 peds of ammo, and he charged himself 2000 peds.

For the EWE 40 Merc, he used the amp 21,200 times and shot the gun 21,088 times. So in this case he actually used the amp 112 times more than the gun, which I don't know how can be explained. Well it's a difference of 1 ped gun decay (or 2 peds amp decay) and 10 peds of ammo difference in either direction. But even using the higher (amp use) total, that's only 1908 peds of ammo used. So he charged himself either 92 or 102 peds of ammo more than what his decay suggests.

For the EWE 41 Military, he shot it 17,185 times, costing 2062.2 peds ammo. So in this case, he undercharged himself.

Given that he made some fairly substantial errors in reporting his costs, I don't think his loot numbers can be trusted too much.

 

[Snuggins]

Thanks for linking that test thread. I am skeptical of that guy's posted results though because his decay totals do not add up, at least for the Breer P5a which is the only one I've calculated so far.

The a104 amp decays 0.02039 peds and the gun decays 0.00938 peds per shot. His stated amp decay was 427.9, meaning he used it 20,986 times. His stated gun decay was 203.19, which would be 21,662 shots.

Okay, so maybe he forgot to repair the amp one time and it broke during one of the runs and he kept shooting another 676 times. But going by his gun decay, 21,662 shots at 9 pecs of ammo per shot is only 1949.58 peds of ammo spend, while he claimed 2020 peds. So that's an extra 70 peds he charged. I haven't calculated decay for his other weapons but I will do that later.

EDIT: For the Korss, he used his amp 23,495 times and his gun 23,492 times. That's close enough for the difference to be negligible and disregarded. But with the Korss using 8 ammo per shot, that's only 1879.36 peds of ammo, and he charged himself 2000 peds.

For the EWE 40 Merc, he used the amp 21,200 times and shot the gun 21,088 times. So in this case he actually used the amp 112 times more than the gun, which I don't know how can be explained. Well it's a difference of 1 ped gun decay (or 2 peds amp decay) and 10 peds of ammo difference in either direction. But even using the higher (amp use) total, that's only 1908 peds of ammo used. So he charged himself either 92 or 102 peds of ammo more than what his decay suggests.

For the EWE 41 Military, he shot it 17,185 times, costing 2062.2 peds ammo. So in this case, he undercharged himself.

Given that he made some fairly substantial errors in reporting his costs, I don't think his loot numbers can be trusted too much.

In regards to the part I bolded, you aren't counting the ammo used by the amp. Korss with a104 on it will use 9(00) ammo per shot. Using this number of ammo per shot though increases the projected ammo cost to 2114.28 (maybe he shot off looted ammo?).

I didn't go through and check all of JJ's numbers but I would take those figures with a grain of salt if you are using data from entropedia to make calculations instead of doing fruit tests yourself. I have only ever checked decay from three items with the fruit test myself, but the value listed on entropedia was wrong in each case (pretty close but not right). In calculations involving a huge number of uses, those little errors can multiply to cause big errors.

In cases like this I tend to consider the bottom line of total cost versus total loot as the most accurate. It is easier to make mistakes when breaking it all down into smaller pieces than it is to be wrong about total spend vs total loot. (guess that kind of depends on how the person calculated total spend though)

 

[PrinceYumil]

Wow you're right I completely missed that the amp costs 1 ammo each shot, so I was wrong for the p5a and the ewe 40 too. I'll recalculate those.

Edit: You are right, he must have included looted ammo.

Add 210 peds of ammo to the p5a
Add 212 peds of ammo to the mercury.

So he shot 2160 peds ammo on the p5a, 2114 on the korss, 2118 on the ewe 40, and 2062 on the ewe 41. Total of ~100 more peds ammo on the (L)s and another 30-35 peds in decay, so probably cost him 20 peds more in losses. I guess it's not that much.

Well in any event, it basically comes down to the fact that he got two more globals over thousands of argos, that accounted for the loot difference. And if there were any updates between the time he started the first test and finished the last, MA could have adjusted the loot on argos.

 

[Alina]

i don't believe in eco... i think an eco weapon just give u more skills when u kill same type of mob same maturity, why... because in same amount of peds u just kill more mobs ( more kills more kill bonus skills ) in long term will better a lot imo...

 

[Karmic]

That's not too far off of normal but again in short runs mini/globals throw off the average returns. What would your return have been without the boar feet, what if you had looted boar feet on two separate mobs? (It was boar foot day yesterday as well, i looted 2 pair ).

I hate to say this over and over again, but most of the attempts to calculate returns here are like trying to calculate the average return of a poker slot machine but ignoring the royal flush payout because you never got one. Average loot returns seem to be between 85-95% for most people that don't get a huge loot, if you hit an ATH that may push your lifetime return closer to the 98-99% which could possibly be the "true" average return.


I've been hunting foul for a bit over a week now and doing runs of approx 1000 foul per run, young to gatherer. My returns have been between 80% and 130% with exactly the same setup each time. Had I used a different gun on the 130% return than I did for the 80% it would be easy to conclude that the 130% setup was better, when, in fact, it wasn't.

I think the best tests of setups would be on always loot mobs removing every mini+. For example, kill atrox young until you've gotten 1000 loots below 8 ped, remove every loot at 8 ped or above from the set completely. do this again with a different setup. Your returns should be closer to the 30-50% range in this case but more directly comparable. (I don't know if 8 ped is the correct cutoff for this mob it's just an example). This is similar to blackhawks test showing that loot seems to be tied closer to damage done to a mob rather than max hp of a mob.

Any tests of dumping ammo into mobs other people are looting? Like doing 30% damage for someone while not teamed with them....

Yes, during SGA while teaming was broken, there was no noticable difference in loot when i teamed with someone a few times, let whoever happened to be able to loot it loot it and split the loot at the end. If the theory was true you would expect our returns to be about half of normal, but they were not (short test though)

 

[Hugh Willose]

Subscribing

 

[JohnCapital]

I hate to say this over and over again, but most of the attempts to calculate returns here are like trying to calculate the average return of a poker slot machine but ignoring the royal flush payout because you never got one. Average loot returns seem to be between 85-95% for most people that don't get a huge loot, if you hit an ATH that may push your lifetime return closer to the 98-99% which could possibly be the "true" average return.

i've cycled 898992.94tt and my tt return is 856250.33tt in the past 12 months and that's counting the ath...

If my math is right, that's a 95.25% return, counting an ATH.

I also have other data, however for the purposes of this test I want to focus on a few things

1. As I said, I admit it's only 1 short test, and could have been coincidence.
2. It's also possible this should have been a 200% return run had I used A101s instead (assuming I would have got the same loot)
3. Yes you can do the exact same runs with wild variations in return. That's the fun (and frustration) of this game. But the key, I think is TT return in the long run.
4. I would love to see others do longer versions of these types of tests. More participants help remove any "lucky/unlucky ava" syndrome.
5. Most importantly, sometimes you just have to test the conventional ideas.

As for the boar feet, my personal belief is that had those ped not come in armor form, I would have got the same amount in oil, skin, BTAUs, and/or some other stuff. But the TT would have been the same. (Also this run seemed to be nothing but no loots and minis. Only 1 mini was the feet. Most were big drops of oil or wool or something. Was strange.)

Oh and PrinceYumil, even if TT return is tied directly to TT spend, eco still matters due to loot variance. If you only have 100 ped you can put toward ammo, you can't go shoot hogglos w/ it, because there's simply not enough turn over to ensure a decent return before you lose everything and have to depo. However, spending 100 ped ammo w/ a smaller gun on snables, sabakuma, exa, etc. does offer better chances for your loot to "adjust" if needed.