imo higher chance of larger multi w/ smaller amps but lower chance of smaller multis.
i have data on this actually.
Edit: i don't really understand what was wrong with the mining TT system in 2010-2014 before "claim size V" and then "kickback central" that prompted all of these changes by mindark. i do believe average TT is higher now, but only if you mine complete dogshit which tells me there's a huge huge issue with resource caps right now and lack of material consumption.
So i'd expect either a mining overhaul (more likely, and hello shrapnel on foma!) or a crafting revamp, yet again, to deal with recycle gambling (never gonna happen with all revenue those gamblers provide)
Hah, I may have a bias in looking at data like this. Runs with bigger amps were shorter, so less chance of a multi.
And the problems of caps. I think this is "new normal", demand is less so MA artificially cuts supply and raises the price so mining seems atracctive at surface. Miners try to comepensate but ofc getting those ores means more tt loss. I don't see easy solution to this. At this stage of game development it's hard to create optimism which I belive is core component.
i agree.. since loot 2.0 the goal appears to be to completely prevent success against the system. however i thikn those with the knowledge/skills should be able to "succeed" but the system seems to bottleneck knowledge/skill to create a very level field.
the game is not fun enough to grind forever without a prospect of success... for hunters loot 1.0 was nice because it showed that if you skilled up and got an efficient enough setup you could succeed. now it appears to be zero-sum.
to keep it more on topic... i don't believe there's a substantial difference. there's some mechanism that kicks a global or two back if your return is too low, but overall i think it's just a matter of what numbers you roll when you drop a probe and find a claim. Been seeing a lot of small amp players hit big towers again, so amps likely just add to cycle speed imo.