Significant drop in success rate

Did a 1000-click testrun on a maxed out BP (basic wires) and got a 92% tt-return.

Shame it's just too small a sample to draw any conclusions from ;D

man. what was your CoS? We don't care about the tt return. Did you read the thread or did you just decide to post for no reason?
 
Weapon Damage Enhancer III 9 clicks 1 enhancer- 11.1%
Weapon Damage Enhancer I 27 clicks 5 enhancers- 18.5%

Pulsar Armour Plate 9 (L) 10 clicks - 2 plates back - 20%
Pulsar Armour Plate 8 (L) 64 clicks - 10 plates back -16%
Pulsar Armour Plate 4 (L) 9 clicks - 2 plates back - 22%
Pulsar Armour Plate 2 (L) 17 - 7 plates back - 40%
Posts like that give MA good excuse to say we're idiots, never heard about the law of large numbers and have no idea how statistics works.

Yes, u prolly had your reasons (the cost per click is high etc) but MA is right, we are idiots... :(
 
Good luck, again these BPs will not be sold, but kept in protest.

I hope you change your mind on that, it only hurts others except the current BP owners who can charge higher prices. Other than that, as Kikki said, the 64 click run was the only one that approached anything like convincing numbers. And even with that, if the clicks were done over the last month, it doesn't reflect the current state of crafting since it has changed dramatically several times over the last month.
 
I think ma actually changed something!?

Sorry again Wollo
 
Last edited:
perhaps again
it was cause of the Huge amount of gambling that turned some switches and one day it's a High and one day it's a Low......
hmmmmmm sounds like a Wave of dynamic Entry
 
Did a 1000-click testrun on a maxed out BP (basic wires) and got a 92% tt-return.

Shame it's just too small a sample to draw any conclusions from ;D

Problem isn't the TT return, but the actual success rate.

If you're crafting to make, let's say plastic springs, you want plastic springs to use for another blueprint, you don't want 90% residue and 10% plastic springs.

And if you use an (L) blueprint to craft vehicles, you want as many vehicles as possible, and not one vehicle from 10 clicks and rest in residues.

When I did a run on plastic springs I saw that there were few successes (2 out of 20 approximately), but there were many tries that was around 95% or so of a success (and thus returned residues instead of the finished item).

This can be a hint for those who are going to click limited or BP with expensive/rare materials: Do a run on something cheap (like plastic springs) on quantity (of course) and note the "success quota". Then decide if to do a real run or wait until the VU or something.
 
Last edited:
Problem isn't the TT return, but the actual success rate.

If you're crafting to make, let's say plastic springs, you want plastic springs to use for another blueprint, you don't want 90% residue and 10% plastic springs.

And if you use an (L) blueprint to craft vehicles, you want as many vehicles as possible, and not one vehicle from 10 clicks and rest in residues.

When I did a run on plastic springs I saw that there were few successes (2 out of 20 approximately), but there were many tries that was around 95% or so of a success (and thus returned residues instead of the finished item).

This can be a hint for those who are going to click limited or BP with expensive/rare materials: Do a run on something cheap (like plastic springs) on quantity (of course) and note the "success quota". Then decide if to do a real run or wait until the VU or something.

I can see your point. Personally, I look at tt-return because, frankly, I have not reached the level where looking at anything else is meaningful:) But for those who craft with a serious planned schedule, yes, it sucks. However, it has been stated before that the changed number is lower due to the fact that partial successes now don't count along with the success percentage anymore. Whether this is true, I do not know.
 
However, it has been stated before that the changed number is lower due to the fact that partial successes now don't count along with the success percentage anymore. Whether this is true, I do not know.

It is not true. Near successes have never counted in the "success percentage" number given in the run summary.
 
Well the new VU is arriving as we speak. Hopefully the TT returns for mining, and the CoS for crafting magically "dynamically" change back to what they used to be (or better?)
 
It's the worst I ever seen.

Lost 4.5k yesterday crafting (and wasn't from recycling over and over, it was 8k ped card down to 3.5k in two runs for a total of 8k ped clicks). Not whining about losing money, I knew I was gamble crafting, so save the drama. But the fact is:

Losing that much on dino shoes in such a short time, (was constant 50% returns) I know it happens, so today I gave it another go. First 1500 ped run was 1200 loss. Here is screenie (I had to exit fullscreen to get screenshot to work, so its a cluster-f@*&)



It was so bad, 1.2 success rate, I never seen it that bad on a run over 200 clicks. (well one time i had .8% success rate on 400 clicks but was cheap click and I had hoffed on it the day before, so I didnt care )At one point it was 160 plus clicks with NO near-success or success. I know it gets like that right before something good, so when the run ended with nothing, I chased with about another 3500 ped worth of clicks, and never got anything over 2xx and still lost tons, it was basically never-ending shit that didn't get above 3.2%.

I am not complaining about losing, I know what I am getting into, but it was a decent sample size with yesterday and today, and I want to share that these roughly 15k ped runs over 2 days averaged under 3% and the return was abysmal. 6.5k lost in about 3 hours total game time.

I have had no big hof crafting in a year almost. I had a 4k korwil hunting two weeks ago, but immediately lost 10k hunting right after that up until yesterday.

So afaic, the vu didn't change anything, cuz this was how it was before too. All the time.

Since there is just no hope anymore, I will be taking a nice break and spending my fun money on a trip to vegas where I know it is virtually impossible to lose 160 hands in a row :)

BP was over 90%, not maxxed, but close. QR around 70 i think.

So go craft dino shoes and get taco's pedz!!!
 
Last edited:
It's the worst I ever seen.

First 1500 ped run was 1200 loss. Here is screenie (I had to exit fullscreen to get screenshot to work, so its a cluster-f@*&)

It was so bad, 1.2 success rate, I never seen it that bad on a run over 200 clicks.

I appreciate you say you know the risks and are not complaining - but DO you know the risks?
If you are on a setting which, on average, would return about 3 successes per 100 clicks, then it is similar to roulette and betting on just one number. If you look at roulette stats, it is not that unusual for a number NOT to come up AT ALL over 200 clicks or so.
On top of that, each success is then a multiplier payout and not a set payout rate, so even any successes you get can be low ones by chance too.

In short: please can we have stats from people on full quantity and maxed (89/90 on the bp), and not confused by those betting on pretty far out odds!

My last cheap 100 clicks the day after the vu was 32% success - just a small statistic in a bigger cloud of data. On its own, it is neither here nor there - with 49 other runs it would be part of something significant.
 
In short: please can we have stats from people on full quantity and maxed (89/90 on the bp), and not confused by those betting on pretty far out odds!

My last cheap 100 clicks the day after the vu was 32% success - just a small statistic in a bigger cloud of data. On its own, it is neither here nor there - with 49 other runs it would be part of something significant.

I am not confusing the stats as you say, as it is clear I was on condition. People craft on both settings. Why can't I post condition results? It doesn't confuse anyone except you I guess.

If you are on a setting which, on average, would return about 3 successes per 100 clicks, then it is similar to roulette and betting on just one number. If you look at roulette stats, it is not that unusual for a number NOT to come up AT ALL over 200 clicks or so.
On top of that, each success is then a multiplier payout and not a set payout rate, so even any successes you get can be low ones by chance too.

You are wrong in comparing it to roulette. Roulette pays 35:1 on those roughly 3 successes out of 100. This paid 7:1 on a normal success, and my overall average for the run with multipliers is only around 9:1 average success on a 15k ped run. Yes this can one day hit higher. I do agree that in both you can have long stretches of losing. I was obviously in that stretch. But will it one day hit higher and get me close to 90% return? Maybe. Either way that is not the point.

The point is I was putting crafting results in a crafting thread so people can look at these results, and my tracker, and can come to their own conclusions. I avoided whining as much as I could, and therefore take your casino lessons and your complaining that the stats aren't the stats that YOU, as a quantity crafter, want, and shove it you know where.

I am sharing info. Not asking for help.

I know 15k run in last 2 days is still a small sample size. But I wanted to share how bad my losses are at crafting with other people, people who can utilize that info, and extrapolate back on tracker, and make more informed decisions for themselves whether or not they want to try gamble-crafting.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Sunsout :)

I've been waiting for someone to be brave enough to try crafting this vu, and publish the results.

Yes, given a run that size on condition it could just be random variation, of course, as you clearly know. But given that it's typical of recent CoS we'd be mad to assume that. Right now, I'm inclined to think "bang go our hopes of post-vu improvement" :( though waiting on further info, to be sure.

I disagree with jetsina. a proper CoS for crafting on condition is 5% ....or was before it became "dynamic". That's the figure i got from numerous several-k runs on dirt-cheap-stuff.

I also agree that you didn't need a freaking lecture!

Thanks again ,

jay :)
 
Ok, I apologise if I sounded like I was lecturing!
I thought we were mainly trying to identify the significant drop in success rates. I guess there is likely to be a focus on negative results here as it is, so I was possibly a bit frustrated by what I thought was a lack of clarity by going out into highly risky terrain.
Who it may confuse is relevant - but is neither you nor me then ;).

But yes, you do provide good info on how risky certain areas of crafting can be, especially if rates are further nerfed without notification.

Was it 5% for condition crafting before? Ok, thanks too for that info then. I'm glad Sunsout posted something that you were looking for.

Edit: I phrased it badly, but my suggestion is that we get more ppl just doing a run of 100 clicks on a cheapie maxed bp of full quantity and putting it in here (or a new thread). It would provide a stable comparison over time that way too (in addition to other useful data sunsout has provided).
 
Last edited:
Success rate for crafting on full quantity is good now.

The condition slider range has been extended on the condition side, so that when you set it to full condition, you're only getting 2-3% success rate instead of the 5+% we're used to. This means that crafting on full condition is gambling twice as much as it was before.

Fortunately, there is a slider which gives you control over your success rate.

Is 2% too low? Move the slider to the left till you get the success rate you want.

Edit: this may have just been changed again... I'm getting around 5% now for full condition. Will have to test more and see if it stays. IMO making success rates dynamic is a horrible idea.
 
Last edited:
Success rate for crafting on full quantity is good now.

What makes you say that?

I did a test run and to be honest, didn't like the results.
The success rate is still too low, to say that something changed.

Market will adjust to the new crafting costs, I'll just wait in side lines.
 
+ rep to jetsina for being big enough to apologise.
hope Taco sees it

jay :)
 
What makes you say that?

I think that 34-38% is OK. Some MUs will have to change if your previous calculations were for 42%. But compared to the 20% we were seeing before, it's much improved.
 
Ok, just got back from a very prosperous weekend. 4 days away from game and no cold-shakes or other withdrawal symptoms. It was the longest I went without logging in in over 2 years probably. :beerchug:

Thank Jet, I was a bit of a smart-ass in my reply and apologize for that too :) (+repped ya)

So from talking to a few others in game and reading Stocktons post, this VU seemed to make the quant crafting less risky and tightened up the loot-swings, while keeping the condition crafting risky still with very large loot swings.

I guess it was important for them to fix quant-crafting, as that is where ALL MU items are crafted to then be placed on the AU house. And the economy needs these items being made. Far too few where chancing MU crafts pre-VU.
 
So I guess the next time there's a universe-wide bad loot for continuous months... it's followed by a month of ATHs and huge ubers? Is that what Bertha bot was trying to say about "not enough of a large sample"? It's not TT-based but time-based?
 
So I guess the next time there's a universe-wide bad loot for continuous months... it's followed by a month of ATHs and huge ubers?

Pretty much...many don't seem to understand that there is "no free lunch"

Uber winners need to thank the depositing player base.. not MA:laugh:
 
Pretty much...many don't seem to understand that there is "no free lunch"

Uber winners need to thank the depositing player base.. not MA:laugh:

Actually this states that there is something as free lunch; only for people taking lunchbreak at 2PM :D
 
Today's test run (post patch) showed higher than normal success rate (40.4%), higher percent product, and therefore lower MU for crafted item.
 
After 6k clicks I'm pretty certain to say success rate averages at 33%.
This means you get about 20% less product compared to say six months ago.
TT return is still what it used to be though.
 
My success rate AND TT returns have been abnormally abominable during the last couple of months. I don't know if I've had one break-even run since then. I usually click 500-2500 times per run (with my total number of clicks during this time period estimated at 15k-20k) on Market Value friendly components (i.e., 120% in on 160% product, 107% in on 135% product, etc.) and end up with maybe ~70% returns after applying the beneficial markup. I'm starting to believe that MindArk is now factoring Market Values into TT return calculations.
 
Back
Top