Info: Leeloo's Mining Guide

[Kerham]

Fully agree on the conclusion, most important is building for oneself a coherent and consistent behaviour and system of refference.

 

[LeelooM]

ADDED a link under depth enhancers in the mining guide :

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/showthread.php?312373-Steady-mining

 

[Tamara Jade]

Leeloo, very helpful guide. Thanks

 

[LeelooM]

!!! WARNING !!!​

More and more I'm getting pm's of people asking me if they should pay for info about mining ... and where to get what.

The answer is simple​

NO​

MA is changing things week by week, month by month, year after year so you are buying a cat in a sack and imo you are paying for a scam !!!

Just use the LBML map and try to find out yourself, cause nothing is that simple as it looks.​

 

[Glenden]

.. Deleted ..

 

[NoBion]

Maybe i can get a show on technics from you soon? ?

 

[R4tt3xx]

This guide is out of date.. I just hit a 783m Crude Oil on a 105 .... Out of range of 522.4+200....

 

[Alina]

This guide is out of date.. I just hit a 783m Crude Oil on a 105 .... Out of range of 522.4+200....

What ? You find oil at any depth lol

 

[Ferial]

What ? You find oil at any depth lol

I was caught up on that for a sec as well. But I think the part he was talking about was not the resource but that the depth was outside of the suggested finder avg depth +-200 range

 

[R4tt3xx]

I was caught up on that for a sec as well. But I think the part he was talking about was not the resource but that the depth was outside of the suggested finder avg depth +-200 range

Correct

 

[kingofaces]

I was caught up on that for a sec as well. But I think the part he was talking about was not the resource but that the depth was outside of the suggested finder avg depth +-200 range

Doesn't seem to be anything out of the line here. That ±200m has always been a ballpark where most claims are going to fall in., though the way averages work, you're always going to get a few a bit outside that range. I don't think anyone has ever suggested that ±200m is a hard limit before.

 

[SoberPhil]

Isn't it like 50%? So for an F105 it would be +- about 250m?

 

[R4tt3xx]

Beat my previous record.. 800m with a 105...

 

[Haruto Rat]

Isn't it like 50%? So for an F105 it would be +- about 250m?

Nope. I've hit a 5 m deep deposit with a 253.8 m finder, which is more than -98% from the average.

 

[R4tt3xx]

Nope. I've hit a 5 m deep deposit with a 253.8 m finder, which is more than -98% from the average.

So we are getting more and more black swans appearing...

 

[kingofaces]

So we are getting more and more black swans appearing...

It’s not really clear how that would be a “black swan”, a result like that would be pretty expected in what’s been described already.

Not to mention that there’s a hard cap at 0, so the distribution is going to skew a bit as you move to shallower depth finders than that. Otherwise if someone mostly uses one finder, it’s not hard to pull their depth data from LBML and run basic average/normal distribution statistics on them. Min/max generally aren’t meaningful, but standard deviation, etc. would be.

 

[R4tt3xx]

807 with a 105

 

[R4tt3xx]

902 with a 105

 

[Vadio]

Depth is broken....

is often i get with cgr(560m avg depth) depths around 1400-1500m
and with Tm8(1000m avg depth) 450+-)

I can search around all my claims screenshot but since i lazy you can believe in me or not