Info: Mining with Fermat - Rookie Finders

[R4tt3xx]

I have decided to challenge myself and really give one of my little Fermat / sunflower mining sheet a good ringing.

The sheet will be uploaded as soon as I am online as well as how it is supposed to work. Please note that the sheet may change and adapt to "perceived in-game changes" and may be paused if the drop rate is bad enough.

I will also attempt to open a in-game chat channel called "sfm" where I will be posting the [X,Y] coordinate pairs that the sheet spits out and ask questions on the ideas behind the sheet. I have decided to change the name to Sunflower as it is more descriptive then Fermat.

I may also expand this thread over time to include information from the chat.

In game times should be from +-14:00 MA time onwards. I want to have fun with this little experiment, and just show what the game does when presented with a little bit of math as well as hopefully get a lot of outsider feedback / ideas.

A breakdown and explanation of the sheets as well as a few shortcomings will also be posted in this thread.

L8r

 

[Rocket192]

logging this with LBML maps/colors and taking screenshots alongside hit rate statistics would be cool.

I'd love to figure out how to get a more consistent, stable hit rate above 32-33% in mining. I'm sure there's a way, but I don't have the time to figure it out and do all the maths, so thank god someone is trying it.

 

[Kerham]

I'd love to figure out how to get a more consistent, stable hit rate above 32-33% in mining. I'm sure there's a way, but I don't have the time to figure it out and do all the maths, so thank god someone is trying it.

There might be, but I am ready to bet that your tt will also adjust to this. Which could become problematic with amps. This is obvious pure speculation on my behalf, more of a gut feeling if anything.

 

[R4tt3xx]

Channel is up ...

Initial sheet is down ..... I do not want to update the thread with the latest google drive url.. Heck you want it, chat to me in the public channel and request it !!!


Initial Mining run is in progress..

Switched to 105, rookie is good, found size 9, left area ....

Returned to area, another size 9 ... left area.

 

[R4tt3xx]

logging this with LBML maps/colors and taking screenshots alongside hit rate statistics would be cool.

I'd love to figure out how to get a more consistent, stable hit rate above 32-33% in mining. I'm sure there's a way, but I don't have the time to figure it out and do all the maths, so thank god someone is trying it.

That's the thing, opportunity cost. It will take more "work" to hit lower claim sizes than higher ones...

EDIT (See now the above is bullshit, this is R4tt3xx from the future and this is how ideas and hypothesis change to fit the latest data... Ignore above.)

Only thing I can suggest right now, is to between drops, re-equip your tool...

 

[R4tt3xx]

No takers tonight on the channel ....

From my initial global of 888 ped. I am up to -+1200 ped, 40% of that value is on the auction which is full.. Currently I am waiting for stuff to expire or sell so that I can go mining once again ...

See U L8r

 

[R4tt3xx]

Horrible mining yesterday... Largest was a modest...

Hopefully today turns out better.

 

[R4tt3xx]

Looking at the data so far.. Aside from not mining when an area is not producing resources, there is no significant difference between itself and mining randomly...

It may be able to pinpoint resoure locations with better accuracy but if no resource exists in the area that you are scanning, no level of math can fix that.

It is frustrating having an area not produce, whats even more frustrating is that your best play at the current moment when that happens may be alt-f4.

Alternatively is mine the area regardless knowing that there probably is very little to no resources. If the above mentioned mining scarcity effects all servers, then alt-f4 is the only choice in the interest of your bankroll.

It's just one of those things.

 

[R4tt3xx]

Looking at the data so far.. Aside from not mining when an area is not producing resources, there is no significant difference between itself and mining randomly...

It may be able to pinpoint resoure locations with better accuracy but if no resource exists in the area that you are scanning, no level of math can fix that.

It is frustrating having an area not produce, whats even more frustrating is that your best play at the current moment when that happens may be alt-f4.

Alternatively is mine the area regardless knowing that there probably is very little to no resources. If the above mentioned mining scarcity effects all servers, then alt-f4 is the only choice in the interest of your bankroll.

It's just one of those things.

R4t once again you are talking out your @$$, You are only using a 105. If this "thing" exists as a 3d object, it will have coordinate sets that you cannot reach as your system / finder only addresses a 2d slice of a 3d object...

So come right, adjust your math to search for a 3d object...

 

[R4tt3xx]

R4t once again you are talking out your @$$, You are only using a 105. If this "thing" exists as a 3d object, it will have coordinate sets that you cannot reach as your system / finder only addresses a 2d slice of a 3d object...

So come right, adjust your math to search for a 3d object...

Yes that is true, All mining tools are thought to addresses a 400m band, +-200m from the finder's average depth...
Assuming that the 3d version works the same as the 2d, the max size of any single tool "cell" is 400m.

I think that the max depth at the moment is 2km, so if thats our lower bound and 0 is our upper, 1km is the sweet spot. With a gap of 400m and the max depth of 2, one should find a habitable mining zone close to 3 drops at a distance of 400m away.

If that "band"does not exist, I would need to gain the skills to mine 1km down in order to address this flaw in my thinking.

Thanks R4t

 

[Me Really Never]

just a quick reminder: you do know that the resource is not predetermined in the ground but rather processed on the moment of searching for it...?

 

[R4tt3xx]

just a quick reminder: you do know that the resource is not predetermined in the ground but rather processed on the moment of searching for it...?

Probability yes, if using this and thinking logically about a problem leads to better results, I will take those results and the logic that preceded it, but do not suppose that a system is random, just because there is no evidence to suggest that it's not.

Within the scope of Vogel's model, it would be child's play to create a 3d model from a 2d one.

The only information we have is of a 3d cylinder, with it's parameters set according to the tool provided.

We the players are not provided with any other information ingame besides that.

A variant of the pattern that the Vogel model produces can be seen in both the extraction animation of a claim AND in the global animation.

To be honest, what I have proposed, I have not tested, I actually just came up with it today, while staring at the pattern.

 

[R4tt3xx]

Yes that is true, All mining tools are thought to addresses a 400m band, +-200m from the finder's average depth...
Assuming that the 3d version works the same as the 2d, the max size of any single tool "cell" is 400m.

I think that the max depth at the moment is 2km, so if thats our lower bound and 0 is our upper, 1km is the sweet spot. With a gap of 400m and the max depth of 2, one should find a habitable mining zone close to 3 drops at a distance of 400m away.

If that "band"does not exist, I would need to gain the skills to mine 1km down in order to address this flaw in my thinking.

Thanks R4t

1km R4t not 2k

So max is 1200m so THREE probes 400m apart should so it.

Eish midpoint is 600m and I use a 105 with an average of 522.4..... 77.6m away.... It should work most of the time..... Going to have to play with it tonight, see how it goes.

 

[Me Really Never]

Probability yes, if using this and thinking logically about a problem leads to better results, I will take those results and the logic that preceded it, but do not suppose that a system is random, just because there is no evidence to suggest that it's not.

Within the scope of Vogel's model, it would be child's play to create a 3d model from a 2d one.

The only information we have is of a 3d cylinder, with it's parameters set according to the tool provided.

We the players are not provided with any other information ingame besides that.

A variant of the pattern that the Vogel model produces can be seen in both the extraction animation of a claim AND in the global animation.

To be honest, what I have proposed, I have not tested, I actually just came up with it today, while staring at the pattern.

i have a simple and easy question:
from a programers point of view, when you have the option to make a very simple system that works perfectly and easy, why would you make a very complicated 3d model of something to put resources in the ground that arent there in the first place? all your theories are based on wrong assumptions...

most likely it is like this:
you press the finder button (search) --> system checks for last probe at a diameter around your coordinates to avoid constant probe spamming on the same spot --> if that checkup is wrong -> NRF --> else check for resource cap and point give out a resource type based on chance / wave and depending on search depth of finder --> set the amount of said resource based depending on wave state --> set a random resource location inside checked diameter --> set random depth inside given out resources specs and around the depth of the finder used

 

[R4tt3xx]

i have a simple and easy question:
from a programers point of view, when you have the option to make a very simple system that works perfectly and easy, why would you make a very complicated 3d model of something to put resources in the ground that arent there in the first place? all your theories are based on wrong assumptions...

most likely it is like this:
you press the finder button (search) --> system checks for last probe at a diameter around your coordinates to avoid constant probe spamming on the same spot --> if that checkup is wrong -> NRF --> else check for resource cap and point give out a resource type based on chance / wave and depending on search depth of finder --> set the amount of said resource based depending on wave state --> set a random resource location inside checked diameter --> set random depth inside given out resources specs and around the depth of the finder used

All I see is alarm bell, after alarm bell after alarm bell, with the mention of the word "random" with the word gambling , a pure random system is not applicable.

Wave state, oh ye I got that too in the model ..... see the only difference between your model and mine, is that mine does not need variables such as randbetween(x,y) or rand() and is based on how full the actual loot pool is... (at least that's it's ultimate goal)

If the pool is empty, you find less deposits, the more it fills up, the more deposits you find, which drains the pool, which repeats the cycle, so ye easy a bloody wave... The wave motion is player made.

 

[Me Really Never]

All I see is alarm bell, after alarm bell after alarm bell, with the mention of the word "random" with the word gambling , a pure random system is not applicable.

Wave state, oh ye I got that too in the model ..... see the only difference between your model and mine, is that mine does not need variables such as randbetween(x,y) or rand() and is based on how full the actual loot pool is... (at least that's it's ultimate goal)

If the pool is empty, you find less deposits, the more it fills up, the more deposits you find, which drains the pool, which repeats the cycle, so ye easy a bloody wave... The wave motion is player made.

you dont necissarily find more deposits when the pool is full. for example rocket was predicting an ATH coming very soon due to low hitrate and overall lower results than usual andn ot even 24 hours later a pretty big ATH popped up. so full pool doesnt mean big hitrate. it can just mean a big hit is coming.

 

[R4tt3xx]

logging this with LBML maps/colors and taking screenshots alongside hit rate statistics would be cool.

I'd love to figure out how to get a more consistent, stable hit rate above 32-33% in mining. I'm sure there's a way, but I don't have the time to figure it out and do all the maths, so thank god someone is trying it.

I have been attempting to work this out for the entire weekend and ........ it's inefficient to try....

Lets do a bit of math. Miners can expect to get 95% of their probes deposited back over time x. The best case scenario of when it is "cracked" would be to have such a reduced variance that each claim would be a size 3....

Yea that is not a very appealing scenario, I hate to loose, but being bored to death getting another size 3 deposit would be even worse. It would be like mining constantly with a md-1, which is extremely efficient in what it does....

Your best bet, would be to put as many probes as efficiently as possible into the ground for the most fun and returns.

That does not mean that math does not have it's place, it absolutely does as a secondary fallback mechanism, a way to bolster and get yourself through the times of multiple NRF's.

I could tell you all how I think the piece of what I am now using works, but due to sufficient lack of interest, I am not going to do so.

You will instead have to prove to me that you have the gumption and drive to want to experiment and listen to what I have to say... Yes please disagree with me and push me forwards but your comment will be frowned upon if it just makes no sense eg it's random... .

The ingame mining channel will stay open if anyone is interested.

PS Gratz on rank 47 Sean Rocket Connors, but you have a ways to go ....

 

[Dorki]

I feel like I read something really important in this thread, but my brain needs time to catch up and pedcard needs an infusion before Dorki starts experimenting a bit more.

 

[R4tt3xx]

I feel like I read something really important in this thread, but my brain needs time to catch up and pedcard needs an infusion before Dorki starts experimenting a bit more.

If you are profiting, your ped card should not need an infusion. Next point. I have noticed time and time again that patterns, including this one or even a hex pattern or even a RANDOM pattern, they all depreciate over time ie their results depreciate the more you use them.

Mining has become so bad for me lately, that if I do not hit after one probing, I press alt-f4. I can change my pattern, but seriously who wants to move more than 5m when mining ?

Enough ranting from me. The vodel / fermat model works quite well in locating resources and the math is quite simple. If I really wanted to mine right now, I would use it, but there are better ones when they work and that's what I am waiting for...