Broken Mining Layers

[R4tt3xx]

The wave is the next wrinkle. I have to know exactly when it flips from one cycle to another and how the spiral is rotated, the physical location of the deposit will tell me it's rotation when the pitch is factored in. This could be very helpful for other miners if true as you could quickly determine how long a wave could last for.

I do not think that major scaling up is possible through tool switching as each tool has a different z IE pitch.

Best tool would be the one that is as close to phi as a pitch.

 

[Heidi S]

 

[R4tt3xx]

Looks delish

 

[R4tt3xx]

Mindark has been watching too much number file....

 

[R4tt3xx]

It is also possible to add a 4 bit decoder to the pitch value which shows nodes with a miss miss, ore miss, miss ent and of course ore matter.

Adding an additional resource would need an 8 bit decoder.

 

[R4tt3xx]

This little game is completely unfair, gambling games have consistent rules that do not change over time, this system does not do that. It's like playing poker with one day the jacks are missing, the next day it's the 10s.

The rules need to be consistent.

 

[Contract CH Hunter]

This little game is completely unfair, gambling games have consistent rules that do not change over time, this system does not do that. It's like playing poker with one day the jacks are missing, the next day it's the 10s.

The rules need to be consistent.

Rules are: TT in, TT out, MA takes % and MU is "possible" profit.

 

[R4tt3xx]

I do have issue with the quality of the game, the in-game tooltip for my primary finder is completely broken, it's information is incorrect, has been for years.

 

[R4tt3xx]

10 hits is a waste of time using as a statistical analysis.

Here is a actual example, the mining run I just completed today.

F105 tier 5 with enhancers and maxed out skill, avg depth 716.4m

Double dropping 161 drops each so 322 drops 34.5% hit rate so 111 claims (Which is fairly good tbh) in a remote area that I haven't mined in months.
No amps
min claim depth 463m
max depth 945m
therefore avg depth (463+945)/2= 704m which is well within any kind of standard deviation.
QED
Stop wasting your time with small runs and fancy over the top maths, it's just some kind of normal distribution curve baised to 95% return with rng to spice it up.

Let me show you the depth numbers for my md1 and you tell me if it makes any kind of sense..

Min depth 5
Average depth 104.5
Max depth 404

Ye that does not look right to me.

In theory this should be the actual md1 stats

Min 5
Average 104.5
Max should be about 200 or so not the 404 that I have a screenshot for.

I don't think we are looking at a standard distribution. Also I think that the depths that can be hit change over time. At least the distribution should tend towards the average which for the md1 it does not do.

 

[detritus2.0]

Let me show you the depth numbers for my md1 and you tell me if it makes any kind of sense..

Min depth 5
Average depth 104.5
Max depth 404

Ye that does not look right to me.

In theory this should be the actual md1 stats

Min 5
Average 104.5
Max should be about 200 or so not the 404 that I have a screenshot for.

Maybe instead of looking up nonsensical spiral projection equations you should look up the difference between average and median.

 

[A-Bomb]

Let me show you the depth numbers for my md1 and you tell me if it makes any kind of sense..

Min depth 5
Average depth 104.5
Max depth 404

Ye that does not look right to me.

In theory this should be the actual md1 stats

Min 5
Average 104.5
Max should be about 200 or so not the 404 that I have a screenshot for.

I don't think we are looking at a standard distribution. Also I think that the depths that can be hit change over time. At least the distribution should tend towards the average which for the md1 it does not do.

It says average, not median.

 

[R4tt3xx]

It says average, not median.

Yes that is what the in-game tooltip states, average...... So the more samples you have the more the average will tend towards the average.

Strange that a md1 can hit over 4 times it's normal depth.... Makes for a really inconsistent tool.

So we are literally right back to the start of the thread. I need to know the min and max depth that can completely change over time.

This is either not going to be worth the effort or I use a set of parameters that worked and see when they work, either way this greatly reduces my interest in the game.

 

[R4tt3xx]

It says average, not median.

Yes that is what the in-game tooltip states, average...... So the more samples you have the more the average will tend towards the average.

Strange that a md1 can hit over 4 times it's normal depth.... Makes for a really inconsistent tool.

Makes my mining a hell of a lot easier, seeing as I know what exactly I am looking for and exactly what coordinates I expect them to be in, it saves me time and drops.

It's the same as old school PE making a map and waiting for that map to respawn.

 

[T16-5 MADMAwith nastya]

Makes my mining a hell of a lot easier

your 20+ years of past mining and post history proves otherwise though

everybody is telling you you're wrong yet you keep going. you need help bro, and not the in-game kind.

please seek help for whatever....this is. it cant be healthy...

 

[detritus2.0]

please seek help for whatever....this is. it cant be healthy...

I think it's mostly the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

 

[R4tt3xx]

It says average, not median.

Yes that is what the in-game tooltip states, average...... So the more samples you have the more the average will tend towards the average.

Strange that a md1 can hit over 4 times it's normal depth.... Makes for a really inconsistent tool.

Makes my mining a hell of a lot easier, seeing as I know what exactly I am looking for and exactly what coordinates I expect them to be in, it saves me time and drops.

your 20+ years of past mining and post history proves otherwise though

everybody is telling you you're wrong yet you keep going. you need help bro, and not the in-game kind.

please seek help for whatever....this is. it cant be healthy...

I see the appeal to a random number generator as an excuse.

 

[R4tt3xx]

I think it's mostly the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

This is more like testing a model and seeing if it matches what it matches in-game X coordinate, y coordinate, depth and type.big job yes.

But what makes it interesting are all the flaws that such a model would reveal.

The wave is one such flaw, the model predicts that when the wave performs a sign flip one would expect to find a miss, then a few meters away a hit, with the hit claim rod being in range of the first drop.

That is a flaw as the player is wasting peds when they should be finding a claim.


The next issue is the layering system itself, in order for prediction to work, the current depth distribution needs to be known which is impractical as it can change at any time.

 

[Rocket192]

Let me show you the depth numbers for my md1 and you tell me if it makes any kind of sense..

Min depth 5
Average depth 104.5
Max depth 404

Ye that does not look right to me.

In theory this should be the actual md1 stats

Min 5
Average 104.5
Max should be about 200 or so not the 404 that I have a screenshot for.

I don't think we are looking at a standard distribution. Also I think that the depths that can be hit change over time. At least the distribution should tend towards the average which for the md1 it does not do.

This is incorrect. I and many others have tested that a finder will "find" claims +/- 300m from the "average" search depth.
F-105 routinely hits 800m+ ores for example.

 

[messi91]

https://tenor.com/dIT9tcrYgwV.gif

 

[R4tt3xx]

This is incorrect. I and many others have tested that a finder will "find" claims +/- 300m from the "average" search depth.
F-105 routinely hits 800m+ ores for example.

It gets messy for the md1, what is 104.5 - 300 ?

It's these little inconsistancies that I would like Mindark to answer in order to help expand the rules.

 

[Rocket192]

It gets messy for the md1, what is 104.5 - 300 ?

It's these little inconsistancies that I would like Mindark to answer in order to help expand the rules.

5m to 404.5m is the accurate range for md1.

 

[kingofaces]

It gets messy for the md1, what is 104.5 - 300 ?

It's these little inconsistancies that I would like Mindark to answer in order to help expand the rules.

That isn’t some grand conspiracy to keep going on about. That’s an obviously bounded range, so if you set an average value to draw a random distribution from, anything above the minimum possible depth is going to be set to that upper bound instead. Like with other comments of yours, intro to statistics courses cover this pretty early on, especially when dealing with variables that have a range limit that can’t go below zero.

That’s why no other experienced miners are surprised on this. You’re basically doing the math wrong on your end and running with assumptions again. That’s not MA’s fault.

 

[R4tt3xx]

5m to 404.5m is the accurate range for md1.

That isn’t some grand conspiracy to keep going on about. That’s an obviously bounded range, so if you set an average value to draw a random distribution from, anything above the minimum possible depth is going to be set to that upper bound instead. Like with other comments of yours, intro to statistics courses cover this pretty early on, especially when dealing with variables that have a range limit that can’t go below zero.

That’s why no other experienced miners are surprised on this. You’re basically doing the math wrong on your end and running with assumptions again. That’s not MA’s fault.

I don't know how to quite explain what I am attempting to do but I will try.

I have something simple setup in Excel that models x coordinates, y coordinates, depth and resource type.

A few days ago I was having a blast as the sheet was literally predicting the correct locations of double deposits, since then it has stopped working. What I am suspecting is that this distribution selects a different range when it regenerates.

It's literally setting the min and max depth that can be hit.

 

[R4tt3xx]

5m to 404.5m is the accurate range for md1.

I will try this, thanks for the info. I will set the max to 'URL can't be found".5

 

[bicckuni]

Are you consuming meth amphetamines or something similar?

 

[R4tt3xx]

Are you consuming meth amphetamines or something similar?

I am looking at why the md1 is so much more complex than other finders.

 

[R4tt3xx]

Are you consuming meth amphetamines or something similar?

Speaking of that, I fractured my lower leg just over a week ago and I was forcabiy introduced to a pretty disgusting drug called morphine. I thought I was going to die. So no I hate drugs...

 

[bicckuni]

Speaking of that, I fractured my lower leg just over a week ago and I was forcabiy introduced to a pretty disgusting drug called morphine. I thought I was going to die. So no I hate drugs...

I don't want to attack you or something and i hope you get good again fast. Was just wondering because you put so much emergy into this thread and people tell you you're wrong but you still arguing. Anyways good luck out in the Entropia Universe, not gonna comment any further here.

 

[R4tt3xx]

That isn’t some grand conspiracy to keep going on about. That’s an obviously bounded range, so if you set an average value to draw a random distribution from, anything above the minimum possible depth is going to be set to that upper bound instead. Like with other comments of yours, intro to statistics courses cover this pretty early on, especially when dealing with variables that have a range limit that can’t go below zero.

That’s why no other experienced miners are surprised on this. You’re basically doing the math wrong on your end and running with assumptions again. That’s not MA’s fault.

I got so fed up last night that I bit the bullet, did a small deposit and bought a 102, the issues with the md1 and 101 vanished immediately as the excel sheet did not look like a silly mess with negative depth, a few drops later, 90% of them hits, I hit a size 14 lyst, tted the lyst and bought a 105, smooth sailing so far, you have got no idea how easy this finder is to use. Anything with a min depth of less than 300m is a nightmare to mine with. Hope Mindark reads this and fixes these finders.

 

[InKwL]

I got so fed up last night that I bit the bullet, did a small deposit and bought a 102, the issues with the md1 and 101 vanished immediately as the excel sheet did not look like a silly mess with negative depth, a few drops later, 90% of them hits, I hit a size 14 lyst, tted the lyst and bought a 105, smooth sailing so far, you have got no idea how easy this finder is to use. Anything with a min depth of less than 300m is a nightmare to mine with. Hope Mindark reads this and fixes these finders.

This game is about to improve.
That is the reason why there are so many finders ingame.
Btw, think that I hit claims at 2150+