Developer-Notes--3

[falkao]

... So bottom line, received loot was proportional to damage done by looter?

This is was what we concluded but it is not a final proof. You do additionally need Jimmy's and Gravediggers insane tests plus some other hunting tests.

PS when my testing is done on eco vs loot, can i email you the results...?

sure ; Although, I'm not very active ingame, I'm still doing a lot of stats.

 

[Ace Flyster]

This is was what we concluded but it is not a final proof. You do additionally need Jimmy's and Gravediggers insane tests plus some other hunting tests.


sure ; Although, I'm not very active ingame, I'm still doing a lot of stats.

Cheers bud

But MA must adore WOW, all that free wasted ammo and decay for them, with no loot returned. WOW must be a cash cow for them?

Rgds

Ace

 

[falkao]

But MA must adore WOW, all that free wasted ammo and decay for them, with no loot returned. WOW must be a cash cow for them?

I don't have any clue about where the lost PED's will go. Possibly they reduce the amount of unconsumed PED's.
In this case it would be only good for MA.

 

[Xen]

Yep sounds like ewe ep-14 is probably the best one, although i will have better HA and Dam but at least it would be a fairer test!!

I only did three runs last night, and i realised that to help with my hyposthesis that loot is tied to health that i need to write down each loot i get.....i havent so far, but future runs i will i suppose

Rgds

Ace

You should use the same exact type of weapons where you have same exact hit/dmg pro standings.

I did a test about 1 year ago with Mann MPH DlxE (1.511 effective dmg/pec maxed) and EWE EP-13 Galactica (2.743 effective dmg/pec maxed). Both non sib laser pistols, with close dps, with large differences in eco.

I recorded each loot and plotted on a graph. I did not do a large data set, but the loots on average were so much higher with the DlxE that I felt I did not need to continue. Note, this does not mean that eco does not matter. One would have to do a much, much longer test to test that.

Also, the loot system could have changed since then.

 

[wizzszz]

Not sure if you do remember the Merry Mayhem in 2009. There were a lot of complaints about bad loots. Especially those that did hunt with a pretagger noticed low returns.

2009 was the 2nd one?

I took part and my loot in the first two mayhems was just fine - the only thing where i lost money was the massive markup on the (L) gun i used (despite "uneco" e-amp 15).

Also, the loot system could have changed since then.

I think that these tests are outdated ...

Outdated? That would mean they did indeed change the loot system - Bjorn|Mindark said it didn't.

You should use the same exact type of weapons where you have same exact hit/dmg pro standings.

Yes, but why not use maxed SIB vs. oldschool? We can't get a bigger eco difference than that.

However, i think just recording the normal loots should give good results already (and ignore the odd 10+ pedders) - twice the damage per PEC is such a big difference, we should have a visible trend after a few 100 kills already. Not enough to prove anything, but the amount of the normal "base" loot should converge to two different values for both weapons.


If it doesn't, the "damage done" theory is probably wrong and we have to take a closer look at "based on mob health".
But this theory has a major flaw anyway: In what way does MA account for high regen mobs then, especially when we have weapons that are so different that people may as well blast three times the PED into a mob with a slower weapon... but MA can only put as much loot into a mob as the most effective weapon on that mob would use.
And even there we can consider eco pretty much useless compared to a very high dmg/sec weapon, as the advantage of a fast kill is significant.

Sorry, but i am ending up at "MA must track spendings" somehow, at least on a small scale.

 

[rhogenbe]

I have done enough hunts on Hogglo youngs with a Swine Deluxe to know that loot is at the very least partly based on decay (that includes ammo). I get entirely different loot returns from the Swine Deluxe compared to my M2930ME + A204 combo.

If you do statistical analysis of loot one needs to know exactly what weapon, attachments, enhancers and what the persons skill is with that weapon as these all seem to be of influence on the loot returned. I am pretty sure that the same weapon will give a difference in loot between a person with hit and damage profession 50 compared to someone with hit and damage profession of 100. This due to the difference in the number of shots needed to do a kill.

In my experience it are the missed shots and the higher loot fluctuations, due to needing a much higher turnover to achieve the same number of killed mobs to get to an average, that makes it very costly to hunt with an high decay weapon like the Swine Deluxe. The big question for me is were does the decay from missed shots go to?

Cheers
Siam

 

[Xen]

Yes, but why not use maxed SIB vs. oldschool? We can't get a bigger eco difference than that.

Because hit ability might matter. And in fact these release notes say so. So using both non sib eliminates that possible factor. Also they are similar dps, dmg and reload, so regen and overkill differences are minimized. I also killed only one maturity (young cornundacauda in my test), and switched weapons after each kill.

 

[wizzszz]

For those that may have missed it:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/showthread.php?132137-Grave-Digger-got-bored

Old test, but the loot system is still the same, according to MA.




And, before we do more tests, shouldn't we spend some time thinking about the underlying problem?

A system, where such massive loots are paid out (200k+) to a few lucky players while others constantly lose (TT wise) and never hit something bigger than 1000 PED in over 6 years of playing - isn't such a system obviously gambling?

Like 0.02 dmg/pec less is not enough to account for the MASSIVE differences in loot.

Unless you make sure people loot only according to their own losses (a.k.a. personal loot pool)...

Some very lucky players who frequently hit bigger loots have stated that they give a damn about eco and label themselves "PED waster".

Because hit ability might matter. And in fact these release notes say so. So using both non sib eliminates that possible factor. Also they are similar dps, dmg and reload, so regen and overkill differences are minimized. I also killed only one maturity (young cornundacauda in my test), and switched weapons after each kill.

That's exactly why i suggested to use a maxed SIB (10/10 HA) vs. olschool (not maxed) weapon - if HA matters, an unmaxed gun should be way less eco than it's maxed SIB counterpart and give a way bigger (and hence better visible, more easy to prove) difference in loots.
(the unmaxed being the low dmg/pec weapon in the test, of course)

 

[valentin]

For those that may have missed it:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/showthread.php?132137-Grave-Digger-got-bored

Old test, but the loot system is still the same, according to MA.




And, before we do more tests, shouldn't we spend some time thinking about the underlying problem?

A system, where such massive loots are paid out (200k+) to a few lucky players while others constantly lose (TT wise) and never hit something bigger than 1000 PED in over 6 years of playing - isn't such a system obviously gambling?

Like 0.02 dmg/pec less is not enough to account for the MASSIVE differences in loot.

Unless you make sure people loot only according to their own losses (a.k.a. personal loot pool)...

Some very lucky players who frequently hit bigger loots have stated that they give a damn about eco and label themselves "PED waster".




That's exactly why i suggested to use a maxed SIB (10/10 HA) vs. olschool (not maxed) weapon - if HA matters, an unmaxed gun should be way less eco than it's maxed SIB counterpart and give a way bigger (and hence better visible, more easy to prove) difference in loots.
(the unmaxed being the low dmg/pec weapon in the test, of course)

MA has changed this --> "That's exactly why i suggested to use a maxed SIB (10/10 HA)" because it wants more money from os.
The max today is SIB (10/20 HA)

 

[wizzszz]

MA has changed this --> "That's exactly why i suggested to use a maxed SIB (10/10 HA)" because it wants more money from os.
The max today is SIB (10/20 HA)

You mean, including enhancers?

A joke if you look at tiering costs...

However, a maxed SIB gun should still be more eco than an oldschool gun (well, not for some of us @ level 100 in hit/dmg, obviously ), because you (are supposed to) miss less.

 

[Xen]

That's exactly why i suggested to use a maxed SIB (10/10 HA) vs. olschool (not maxed) weapon - if HA matters, an unmaxed gun should be way less eco than it's maxed SIB counterpart and give a way bigger (and hence better visible, more easy to prove) difference in loots.
(the unmaxed being the low dmg/pec weapon in the test, of course)

I don't think you understand what I was testing. I want to eliminate the difference in hit ability possibly making a difference. I was testing extreme differences in eco between two weapons, all other differences eliminated as much as possible.

 

[Xen]

Here's my test:

100 kills with each weapon, alternating each kill.

Pretty clear pattern imo.

 

[wizzszz]

I don't think you understand what I was testing. I want to eliminate the difference in hit ability possibly making a difference. I was testing extreme differences in eco between two weapons, all other differences eliminated as much as possible.

Yes, i got that, you wanted to test dmg/pec differences only - but if we want to test eco in general, shouldn't we aim for the biggest difference we can get? And a lower HA will add quite a lot to that difference.

Here's my test:

100 kills with each weapon, alternating each kill.

Pretty clear pattern imo.

Yes, pretty obvious.

Confirms grave diggers test - the more ammo you blast into a mob, the bigger your loots are.
Or in other words: Being uneco doesn't mean a thing, loot is based on what you spend - and this confirms that they do keep track of what you spend (lose).

Don't worry though, the next dev notes will read that your test was flawed and any conclusion derived from it is null and void...

 

[Pyhä Antero]

Pretty clear pattern imo.

These results were captured on the same run?

 

[wizzszz]

These results were captured on the same run?

Obviously:

100 kills with each weapon, alternating each kill.

 

[Pyhä Antero]

Confirms grave diggers test

Repeat the test with the same result and I agree that eco doesn't matter a thing in this VU.

 

[Xen]

Confirms grave diggers test - the more ammo you blast into a mob, the bigger your loots are. Or in other words: Being uneco doesn't mean a thing, loot is based on what you spend - and this confirms that they do keep track of what you spend (lose).

Don't worry though, the next dev notes will read that your test was flawed and any conclusion derived from it is null and void...

No, that test does not prove that eco does not matter. The test is not anywhere near big enough to show a direct and proportional correlation in loots to the eco of the guns. It only shows that more ped in means more ped out, but not necessarily that the higher eco won't result in a higher tt % return. You'd need a much, much longer test to measure that, one which exceeds my patience level.

And yes, same run. If you do one run eco and then later one run uneco, you could be in different loot periods and it could skew the results.

 

[mrproper]

Or in other words: Being uneco doesn't mean a thing, loot is based on what you spend - and this confirms that they do keep track of what you spend (lose).

Or that mob loot is proportional to spent PED and not inflicted damage.

I still don't see it though, the data needs some statistical analysis tools applied...

 

[mrproper]

It only shows that more ped in means more ped out, but not necessarily that the higher eco won't result in a higher tt % return.

So the less eco setup with more peds in results more ped out, but it doesn't mean that the more eco setup with less peds in will result in less peds in? ILLOGICAL!!! ABORT!!! ABORT!!!

 

[Xen]

So the less eco setup with more peds in results more ped out, but it doesn't mean that the more eco setup with less peds in will result in less peds in? ILLOGICAL!!! ABORT!!! ABORT!!!

The uneco gun means more ped in and higher loots.

The test does NOT show that you would get the same tt % return with each weapon.

Comprende?

 

[mrproper]

The uneco gun means more ped in and higher loots.

The test does NOT show that you would get the same tt % return with each weapon.

Comprende?

Nor did it show that the tt % return was different, which is what the quoted post suggested.

 

[Joat]

Confirms grave diggers test - the more ammo you blast into a mob, the bigger your loots are.
Or in other words: Being uneco doesn't mean a thing, loot is based on what you spend - and this confirms that they do keep track of what you spend (lose).

Don't worry though, the next dev notes will read that your test was flawed and any conclusion derived from it is null and void...

To be fair to MA, they never said they didn't track what we spend, just that they
don't track each avatar's return over time.

 

[wizzszz]

To be fair to MA, they never said they didn't track what we spend, just that they
don't track each avatar's return over time.

Well, what about killing 10 mobs without looting them and then loot them all after.

They must track something over time, no?

No, that test does not prove that eco does not matter. The test is not anywhere near big enough to show a direct and proportional correlation in loots to the eco of the guns. It only shows that more ped in means more ped out, but not necessarily that the higher eco won't result in a higher tt % return. You'd need a much, much longer test to measure that, one which exceeds my patience level.

Well, yes - the test is too small, but it has shown pretty much the opposite of what we'd expect when loo is tied to mob health.

And yes, it doesn't mean eco is dead, only that it works different than we thought:

Assuming you can kill a mob with an eco gun and pay 1 PED and with a non-eco gun you pay 2 PED.

Further, assuming we get 90% TT back...

Then we have paid 0.1 PED to kill the mob with the eco gun and 0.2 PED to kill the mob with the non-eco gun.

Twice the costs for the SAME task, but the return rate is STILL 90% for both!
(Still means we paid 0.1 PED more than we should have)

 

[Xen]

Nor did it show that the tt % return was different, which is what the quoted post suggested.

I know what you are trying to get at. My posts do not show that eco does not matter. There is nothing that "does not compute".

 

[Xen]

Well, what about killing 10 mobs without looting them and then loot them all after.

They must track something over time, no?




Well, yes - the test is too small, but it has shown pretty much the opposite of what we'd expect when loo is tied to mob health.

And yes, it doesn't mean eco is dead, only that it works different than we thought:

Assuming you can kill a mob with an eco gun and pay 1 PED and with a non-eco gun you pay 2 PED.

Further, assuming we get 90% TT back...

Then we have paid 0.1 PED to kill the mob with the eco gun and 0.2 PED to kill the mob with the non-eco gun.

Twice the costs for the SAME task, but the return rate is STILL 90% for both!
(Still means we paid 0.1 PED more than we should have)

ffs, my test does not show that the tt return would be 90% or the same for both weapons. Stop trying to jump to that conclusion.

You people should try to be objective and do valid tests instead of promoting an agenda.

 

[Joat]

Well, what about killing 10 mobs without looting them and then loot them all after.

They must track something over time, no?

They don't track return over time to compensate a bad month. That's what it's about.
Imo lootprocess is a ongoing progress, you build up values that are used when you do the
interaction of looting.
Question is, do values move on if certain criterias isn't met when we do the looting?
I think so, how else would system regulate no loots?
This way they don't have to track your return over time, if you fail to create right values
when you build up your loot, your loot will be less good.
For those few that do build up value "in the right way" will always be successful (well, in
averge at least ). Why do same people get better globals over and over again?

 

[wizzszz]

ffs, my test does not show that the tt return would be 90% or the same for both weapons. Stop trying to jump to that conclusion.

You people should try to be objective and do valid tests instead of promoting an agenda.

Errm...

Further, assuming we get 90% TT back...

"Assumptions" are a known concept to you?

Reading the posts completely would clearly help - i promise, it's worth it, it gives an explanation why eco still matters when when loot turns out to be based on what we spend. (which is what your tests are insinuating)

They don't track return over time to compensate a bad month. That's what it's about.
Imo lootprocess is a ongoing progress, you build up values that are used when you do the
interaction of looting.
Question is, do values move on if certain criterias isn't met when we do the looting?
I think so, how else would system regulate no loots?
This way they don't have to track your return over time, if you fail to create right values
when you build up your loot, your loot will be less good.
For those few that do build up value "in the right way" will always be successful (well, in
averge at least ). Why do same people get better globals over and over again?

That's not the main point, the real question is: Where do our losses go?
(the "unexpected" losses, runs way below average)

Distributed to other players, with a 1/100000 chance?
This is SO gambling, that the system can't work like that or the swedish gambling commission must be deaf, mute and blind.

 

[Pyhä Antero]

So could someone confirm that loot differs on kill cost? The bigger the cost more loot you would receive, is needed because the economy couldn't run on "uber eco" tools, but in which point economy becomes efficient is the question. And how that kind of system could work...

 

[JohnCapital]

No, that test does not prove that eco does not matter.

Assuming you can kill a mob with an eco gun and pay 1 PED and with a non-eco gun you pay 2 PED.

Further, assuming we get 90% TT back...

Then we have paid 0.1 PED to kill the mob with the eco gun and 0.2 PED to kill the mob with the non-eco gun.

Twice the costs for the SAME task, but the return rate is STILL 90% for both!

ffs, my test does not show that the tt return would be 90% or the same for both weapons. Stop trying to jump to that conclusion.

You people should try to be objective and do valid tests instead of promoting an agenda.

In fairness Xen, I think you jumped on this a little wrong. In fact, you and Wizzszz are basically saying the same thing. That being: Loot seems to be tied to spending, but excess spending (and higher looking loot) does not mean better returns.

And I must agree with this. I've done many tests showing that loot is often tied (though loosely, not on every specific mob in a pattern that is obvious) to weapon decay spent. (many other factors as wel, but that's another story.)

Whether you agree with the "avg 90% long term" rule, or you beleive in statistical averaging, the fact is that in both cases, tests show that lowering your cost/kill helps cover the spread between TT spend/return.

I talked about this in bigger detail in my "why skills matter in personal loot system" or somesuch title thread. While I was wrong about a personal loot pool, the numbers (basically the same Wizzszz used as an example) do still work, and flow well with known tests.

In short: Bigger spending does mean more loot, but maybe bigger % loss vs more eco methods.

 

[Xen]

I don't want to make assumptions, and it seems like wizz and mrproper want to gravitate towards the "you'll get 90% return no matter what you do" and/or "eco doesn't matter" theory.

My test does not show that, and I'm not trying to "insinuate" anything. My test only shows that more tt in means higher tt loots, but not necessarily the same % return no matter what you do. I only posted because of talk about loot being based on hp, which it clearly was not at the time of the test (May 2011).