Amped mining HR/TT return/MU

[LeelooM]

This morning I decided to do some amped mining runs and share my way of mining even when it went bad or good and this is 1 of them

I went to an non-taxed LA where I mostly have a HR of 29-38% (depending time and if another miner has mined there before me within 2-3 hours)

Using : F-106 - T-105 - ME/01

Doing 100 drops and it started unamped.

So after 10 drops my HR was ok (over 33%)

Amped up with a LVL 1 amp and did another 10 drops, so now we did 20 drops and my HR was still over 33%

Changed to a LVL 2 amp and my HR was climbing

Amped up with a LVL 3 amp

As expected the HR started dropping and the difference between costs/TT return is getting bigger
I decided to give it another try since my HR was still above 33% and kept the LVL 3 amp on

The HR went down again and cost/TT return is getting bigger and bigger ....

I went back to LVL 2 amp because of the HR (under 33%) and because I started to loose on the TT

HR keeps dropping so now I'm back to LVL 1 amp

Going really bad now so after this I did the 30 drops left unamped

Because I went unamped the HR started climbing again, but not enough to recover the losses.

Results :
Cost : 85,50 ped
TT return : 57,93 ped
Decay : 1,93 ped

What did I get :
Cave sap : 14,43 @ 150% = 21,65 ped
Garcen : 9,20 @ 115% = 10,58 ped
Magerian : 30,25 @ 101% = 30,55 ped
Typo : 4,05 @ 150% = 6,07 ped
Totall : 68,85 ped so minus 16,65 ped even with %

I did the same runs in the past over and over again like this and every time I used the amp 3 there it went wrong.

Will continue to do this run again next week but only using amp 2 maximum and at a different time !!!

 

[jambon]

Yeah seems about right. Bigger the amp worse the hit rate. One of the main reasons I stopped mining as a primary profession.

Imo hit rate volatility is the #1 thing that needs to be fixed with mining. Should be made similar to hunting where every drop hits something. Maybe to a point where you see more unamped minimals and even start getting shranel in the hits to offset for resource scarcity

 

[Alukat123]

Imo hit rate volatility is the #1 thing that needs to be fixed with mining. Should be made similar to hunting where every drop hits something.

yeah, that's a good idea. Then maybe something like 1.01 PED drop (unamped F-101):
always giving 0.85-0.92 PED outdoors per drop if not multiplied.
0.5-0.85 PED indoors if not multiplied, with higher chance to get multiplier.

 

[Ace Flyster]

Amps never use to effect hit rate?!?

if I was doing the tests, I would do minimum 100 drops with each amp, and 100 without.

Good luck with future drops.

Rgds

Ace

P.S. - i remember going 18 drops+ without a hit in the past. Which is why 10 drops doesnt really tell you anything. I will see if i can drag out my old spreadsheets of mining amped runs.

 

[LeelooM]

Yeah seems about right. Bigger the amp worse the hit rate. One of the main reasons I stopped mining as a primary profession.

Imo hit rate volatility is the #1 thing that needs to be fixed with mining. Should be made similar to hunting where every drop hits something. Maybe to a point where you see more unamped minimals and even start getting shranel in the hits to offset for resource scarcity

Or even get probes back on "no hit" that you don't need to drill up, cause that would make the run take a lot longer also.

The effect of lower HR is doing a good job cause lots of resources are getting a much better MU, so I can only encourage that.

This is the first time I made a thread about it, but I'm doing the same area over and over again with amps, unamped, switching amps, steady amps and always had the same results, higher amps = lower HR, not only in this zone.

I started to use only amp 1 cause I'm trying to finish the last enm missions and with level 1 amp I do not get tiny's (that only give 50% of points) so when the run was going ok, I switched to lvl 2 and so on...

 

[bigdaddy trim]

Yeah seems about right. Bigger the amp worse the hit rate. One of the main reasons I stopped mining as a primary profession.

Imo hit rate volatility is the #1 thing that needs to be fixed with mining. Should be made similar to hunting where every drop hits something. Maybe to a point where you see more unamped minimals and even start getting shranel in the hits to offset for resource scarcity

Thats a dreadful idea. Mining is fine if you know what you doing. From my personal experince amps dont effect hit rate.

 

[narfi]

If i was going to test this I would do it like this,

pick 3x 1hr slots in a day seperated by atleast 3hrs each.
Pick a location you want to mine.

for one week mine those hour slots in that area unamped = 21 mining runs of whatever you can do in an hour 50 drops? 100 drops? whatever you can consistently do without variation.

Then do the same thing for another week with L1 or whatever. (21 runs)

Then do the same thing for another week with d-class or whatever. (21 runs)

Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)
Then repeat the cycle a few more times (another 3 week cycle following the same exact pattern)

IMO a few drops of this, change everything, a few drops of that, change everything, a few drops of something else is no way to scientifically discover anything.

 

[kingofaces]

Low sample size obviously makes randomness more likely making it seem like there's a trend when there isn't, so I thought I'd run some basic statistics on it.

The first was basic 95% confidence intervals of your hit rates for each picture you posted. With only 10 drops in your first unamped "run" you had a 40% hit rate, but the low sample size means the confidence interval was between 10 to 70%. Basically, if another run falls within a confidence level range, you can't call it different than the other. All of the other runs fall within that range, so you can't say any of the other runs with amps were actually different yet because those differences are likely just due to chance.

For a look at how future analysis might go with bigger sample sizes, I also plotted finds per drop for each run (two replications for each amp or unamped). It looks like the hit rates were actually pretty similar throughout aside from that unlucky second level 1 run. There's basically no real trend when you plot amp decay vs hit rate, but there's also not enough of a sample size to detect one if it existed either.

Just for the nuts and bolts, here's the statistical output for that trend (binomial regression).

Coefficients	Estimate	Pr(>|z|)
Intercept	-0.7968	0.506
AmpDecay	-0.3557	0.870

The negative AmpDecay term means that if you just draw a line in the points, you can see a decrease of around 6% from unamped to level 3, but you can't call it a true decrease until that probability value (ranges from 0 to 1) is around the range of 0.1 or ideally 0.05 to rule out pure chance or randomness. Having 0.87 instead means there is basically no evidence supporting any kind of change over the amps or in simpler terms, you can't say the rate of change over amp size is different from zero yet.

Leeloo, if you get more updated numbers you'd want me to run like this, just let me know and I can run some updated stats to see if there's any actual trend. They way you did it works ok, but all I really need is the number of drops for each run (i.e., before switching to another amp) and your cumulative hit rate at the end of each run. If you can just get the hit rate for that individual run instead of all test runs to date, that might make the number checking a little easier on the off chance you forget to record the numbers for a particular run, which would then affect all the subsequent run calculations.

We've talked about alternating between "treatments" every drop in other tests to take out confounding effects of time (e.g., someone ATF's right before you switch to level 3 and it theoretically affects loot), but doing 10 or even up to 30 drops for each treatment actually isn't too bad in that regard. Basically, you don't want to be doing an unamped treatment one day and then wait for a level 1 run the next day. Ideally, you should have a similar amount of drops for each in a similar period of time in a similar location. In experimental design, we call this a blocking design where we'd make sure all the treatments are grouped together in similar conditions, and then go to another location to set up another "block". Once each treatment has 100 total drops, that might be a good point to check in again to see if there's any trend.

 

[morey]

Interesting find. But yeah, would love to have a bigger sample to look at .

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to LeelooM again.

 

[trance]

Hit rate is also srinking or climping, about how much resources are crafted, or going back to the stock.
So if a lot ppl craft, and a lot resources are need, hit rate is higher, all around.

Good to see on my mining the last few days. MM event is done, less ppl craft guns, MU at resources are most down yet. So this means there are less resources need. Since the MM event is over and MU is falling downm also my hit rate is falling down.

P.s. I cycle about 1200 ped near every day on caly mining. Most i use a Dsec seeker 30 and do both together with one drop. Near same mining stile, as i do with my 106 finder. While MM i got realy nice payback, and my hit rate was nice. Since this week, my hit rate is down, and payback also.

I realy think, that mining also is depending how crafting is runing (resources are used). Maybe i be wrong with that, but each time after a such event, if MU going down at resources, and less ppl craft or play, my hitrate is also down.

Now, since i have a preamped finder, i also think that i get a bit less hitrate with Dsec seeker, as i got with F 106, but the biger claims help to get near same back, as if i use a 106 finder unamped. (decay and MU inclouded in calculation)

Well, will see how this continue. At moment i be using the 3. Dseeker 30 in a row. I realy hardcore testing that finder.

 

[LeelooM]

Thank you all

As I checked auction I see now there is also less availabitity for garcen (only 3 pages), cause my average return of garcen there is 35,88% where I got only 9% now, so that can affect the run also if not compensated with something else.

The area I'm testing this is like 450 drops but this is the good part of it so I'm not gonna expand it. It also needs to be done at the same time/run. I only do this during the week and not in the weekend cause there are far more miners so the window mining might be disturbed, but I can say by the first 20 drops if claims are back 100% or not (know the place inside out lol)

I also have various results depending the time of mining, here again, might be in another/disturbed window

And at last but not least, window mining with 90-120 minutes here is terrible and I need at least 3 hours before I go back. Strange cause I have been doing the same with alic and had great results even after 2 hours at a different place (server)

For alic I only did 50 drops with a result of 57,99% alic every 2 hours but that area is to small to do the amp test.

EDIT @ Trance : I just checked the dates for my daily alic runs and my TT return there was between 106,01% - 178,40% and a HR between 34% - 38% (without globals) and from jan 4th the TT return dropped dramatic to 75,23% - 86,40% with a HR from 41,67% - 87,09% with a loss on every run

I'm pretty sure amps do affect the HR, if not I would mine with an amp 13 all the time when my HR is over 33%
Then again it might be so that with certain (higher) amps, certain claims are blocked. This doesn't seem to affect the igni and redu cause these are needed to craft amps.

@ King : I'll keep posting my results so you can check them and tyvm for that, this is very interesting

 

[LeelooM]

Low sample size obviously makes randomness more likely making it seem like there's a trend when there isn't, so I thought I'd run some basic statistics on it.

The first was basic 95% confidence intervals of your hit rates for each picture you posted. With only 10 drops in your first unamped "run" you had a 40% hit rate, but the low sample size means the confidence interval was between 10 to 70%. Basically, if another run falls within a confidence level range, you can't call it different than the other. All of the other runs fall within that range, so you can't say any of the other runs with amps were actually different yet because those differences are likely just due to chance.

For a look at how future analysis might go with bigger sample sizes, I also plotted finds per drop for each run (two replications for each amp or unamped). It looks like the hit rates were actually pretty similar throughout aside from that unlucky second level 1 run. There's basically no real trend when you plot amp decay vs hit rate, but there's also not enough of a sample size to detect one if it existed either.

Just for the nuts and bolts, here's the statistical output for that trend (binomial regression).

Coefficients	Estimate	Pr(>|z|)
Intercept	-0.7968	0.506
AmpDecay	-0.3557	0.870

The negative AmpDecay term means that if you just draw a line in the points, you can see a decrease of around 6% from unamped to level 3, but you can't call it a true decrease until that probability value (ranges from 0 to 1) is around the range of 0.1 or ideally 0.05 to rule out pure chance or randomness. Having 0.87 instead means there is basically no evidence supporting any kind of change over the amps or in simpler terms, you can't say the rate of change over amp size is different from zero yet.

Leeloo, if you get more updated numbers you'd want me to run like this, just let me know and I can run some updated stats to see if there's any actual trend. They way you did it works ok, but all I really need is the number of drops for each run (i.e., before switching to another amp) and your cumulative hit rate at the end of each run. If you can just get the hit rate for that individual run instead of all test runs to date, that might make the number checking a little easier on the off chance you forget to record the numbers for a particular run, which would then affect all the subsequent run calculations.

We've talked about alternating between "treatments" every drop in other tests to take out confounding effects of time (e.g., someone ATF's right before you switch to level 3 and it theoretically affects loot), but doing 10 or even up to 30 drops for each treatment actually isn't too bad in that regard. Basically, you don't want to be doing an unamped treatment one day and then wait for a level 1 run the next day. Ideally, you should have a similar amount of drops for each in a similar period of time in a similar location. In experimental design, we call this a blocking design where we'd make sure all the treatments are grouped together in similar conditions, and then go to another location to set up another "block". Once each treatment has 100 total drops, that might be a good point to check in again to see if there's any trend.

How I did the runs is :
Drop 1-10 / 11-20 / 21-30 / 31-40 / 41-50 / 51-60 / 61-70 / 71-80 / 81-90 / 91-100
If HR is +33% use higher amp for the next 10 drops
If HR is -33% use lower amp for the next 10 drops

This block of 100 drops is the best in a location of about 450 drops to be honest, mostly the first 50 are the best, after that is goes downwards mostly, but I keep doing 100. I also agree changing amps needs to be done in the same run, as we discussed even changing finders every drop at the same time/place.

Why 33% = IF I get a hit every 3th drop (and claim sizes are normal) I would make profit for sure. If HR is less and you use amps = loosing guaranteed. This is based on amp cost/throw

Counting on a bigger hit is no option, that % is very low, so I try to mine safe (amped) mining, and I do think that a bigger claim is avatar based on the 96-97% TT return we all should get.

All this is just my opinion off course but for me it's also fun.

 

[kingofaces]

How I did the runs is :
Drop 1-10 / 11-20 / 21-30 / 31-40 / 41-50 / 51-60 / 61-70 / 71-80 / 81-90 / 91-100
If HR is +33% use higher amp for the next 10 drops
If HR is -33% use lower amp for the next 10 drops

If you're consistent in doing it that way, I can still run the tests all the same if you want. I'd be curious to see if it actually does affect your hit rate or not. There isn't any trend right now, but one could still show up with higher sample sizes.

 

[LeelooM]

Deal !!! and indeed, consistency is the key here