Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Info: Project, TT% returns, 90%?

Ace Flyster

Ace Flyster

Marauder
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Posts
5,031
Location
England, London
Avatar Name
Dave Ace Flyster
Big thankyou to Falkao and Immortal for their Rebombing statistical anaylsis, i will try to gather it all together and post here for easy access

There is a lot of discussion at the moment at how long does it take to get a decent % return. So this log is to keep track of that

Pre VU10 i was use to minimum 90% returns, since i have seen a different shift in tt returns in mining, i thought i would share my findings

My last 58k spent in mining has given back 83.69% tt returns, this is a lot lower than I expected.

This blog will start from now, at 60k spent and lets see how long it takes to get to the previously seen 90% returns if at all possible now in mining?

Now i am aware short term could give a high number so this blog will run for at least 10k peds spent. I no longer can mine as much as use to due to rl commitments so this will be slow i am afraid

Starting values
TT spent = 60433
TT returns = 50574
TT % return = 83.67%

Refining costs not included nor any hunting mobs that get in my way, which are not too many, maybe 10 peds per run

Will be done with mainly 101 amps or no amps and with vrx2k or if i hit a biggy then vrx3k as i am close to maxing it, two levels to go ;)

All posts are welcome

Rgds

Ace

Running Total

Total TT Spent: 88941
Total TT Returns: 76854
Total TT % return: 86.41%



Hit rate sample when rebombing claims:
Total bombs = 19152
No. of finds = 4805
Hit rate = 25.08%

Rate of SOOTO Finds
No. of Bombs = 21888
No. of SOOTO's = 5
Rate = 4378 bombs per find

Competition has started
Win 1000 EFD
Guess how many bombs untill the next SOOTO find

Finally i got an SOOTO find,
Bomb number 7409, gratz to Wolverine for guessing 8500 and being closest, 1000 EFD on your way, will post it in your post where you guessed


Steffel 69
Sibolovin 363
Esme 568
Das 666
Harm 938
BBpunisher 1001
Lyrisiana 1234
Exsolvo 1500
UnaAlconbury 2356
Kosmos 2500
Khaso 2674
JC 2790
Immortal 3000
Leona 3333
Mandred 3500
HinDragoz 4250
overburn 4873
captee 5000
Wolverine Queen 8500
Sofia 12600
CMS 13013​


Useful info: Thankfyou Falkao for this
mining_payout.jpg


Useful Links:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/mining/167998-mining-payout.html
https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/mining/132510-mining-loot-analysis.html
https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...log-mandus-90-tt-return-test.html#post2512718

falkao said:
I'll try to summarize the model we're using so far and here some additional reading that might help:
Spatial randomness
Poisson distribution

Assumptions for mining:

1) There exists a base unit area to which one and only one claim can be assigned.
2) All base units do have the same probability p to get a claim assigned and are independent of each other.

Hence a mining field (we can call it spot) is made up of n = n1*n2 base units.
With a finder of range r we are searching r^2*pi such base units contemporarily.


The probability to get at least one find would correspond then to a binomial distribution with number r^2*pi attempts on p.

If we do assume that the base unit is a 1mx1m square, then we would search about 9503 such units with a finder of range 55m.

To model this with a binomial distribution is quite laborious. If p is very small and n is very large, then the binomial distribution converges to a Poisson distribution with parameter l = n*p, the density of the points in the mining field.
Moreover, the probability to get a certain number of finds in a a subarea of the mining field will be proportional to the probability of a find in the mining field. Hence, we don't need to know n and p but only l and do assume that for the area that we are searching some l' proportional to l exists. Let's use the following notation:

Po(l,k) = l^k*exp(-l)/k!

to denote a Poisson distribution with parameter lambda = l. Po(l,k) is then the probability to get exactly k finds in the search area with density l.


Sry, but all this was necessary to define and describe spatial randomness. Now let's start with our observations.


Solution

The only thing we do know is the probability of at least one find in the search area covered by the finder. Hence, we only know

h = hit rate = P(at least one find in search area) = 1-Po(l',0).


From this we can calculate the density l' for the search area (please note that this is not the whole mining field).

l' = -ln(1-h)

When rebombing (image shows optimal situation with find on perimeter)
[br]Click to enlarge[/br]

part of the old area is searched again (dark) plus a new area (light). Hence, the probability to get at least one find in the second bomb is a combination of the hit rate of those two areas.

Let's call the search area A, the part of the old area O and hence the new area N becomes A-O. This can be also written as

O = A*w,
N = A*(1-w), with a w >= 0 and <=1.

A rebomb will occur number hit rate times, i.e. h times. Hence overall hit rate will be

h' = h(1+h2)/(1+h), where

h = hit rate
h2 = hit rate of second bomb.

Hence the only thing that we need to find is h2.

Immortal uses an approximation here in assuming that only the hit rate of the new area is relevant not accounting for additional finds in the part of the old area O.

Since we know, that we deal with Poisson distributions, we can model this, assuming that area O is not too small. Otherwise the approximation with the Poisson distribution will not work and we might have to switch back to a binomial one.


h2 = 1- P(XO + XN = 0),

where XO and XN are respective random variables for the number of finds in O and N.

As XO and XN are independent we can write this as

h2 = 1-P(XO=0)*P(XN=0)

P(XN=0) = exp(-l'*(1-w))


P(XO=0) is a conditional probability as we already had a find in O. Hence

P(XO=0) = l'*w*exp(-l*'(1-w))/(1-exp(l'*(1-w))

h2 is then

h2 = 1 - l'*w*exp(-l')/(1-exp(l'*(1-w))

Examples:

h= 27% with 55m finder
l' = 0.31471
w = 20% (optimal case when double bombing)

then
h2 = 24.7%

overall = 26.5%

w = 30% (mean case)
then
h2 = 23.5%

overall = 26.3%

w = 0% (no rebombing)
then
h2 = 27% (limiting case as lim x/(1-exp(-x)) = 1 for x ->0 )

overall = 27%


w = 100% (double bombing the same first drop)
then
h2 = 14.9% (limiting case)

overall = 24.4%


Comments:
Although it looks easy, it was rather difficult to find the right approach, at least for me. I was trapped by several errors. One was that the search area for the 2nd bomb contains part of the old are with one find and part of a new one. As total area is still the same I’ve thought that this would be the same situation as for the first drop but with one claim missing. This is indeed not the case as proven above, but why? The new area adds information that was not available before and hence we do have a new situation in the 2nd drop. To combine old with new information to get a common probability was the main issue to solve.
Click to expand...

Other bits of random info:
Finder decay effects claim sizes, this was shown in a competition myself and Xen were in, more details in this thread
 
Last edited:
Total Bombs: 35704

103 amps, 168 bombs
TT spent this run: 512
TT returns: 587
% this run: 115

Total Spent: 60945
Total Returns: 51161
Total % return: 83.95

Rgds

Ace
 
martinstids said:
subscribe. Gz for 2000 post, Ace ;)
Click to expand...

Same here I also have tried doing something like this but with just materials I get from animals. I just tt some stuff and see if the loots give me back 90% like ppl say it does. But I keep the nice mu items :D and auction that off. so "subscribing".

~Mark~
 
Good luck with your project - I'm very curious what your results will be.

But there are 2 things I should mention:

1. Many times I've seen you were saying on EF that average mining returns in the long run are around 95% - I've read this as your opinion even long after VU10. What made you change your mind and lower it to 90%?

2. Usually when I was mining so called "lyst fields" (I dont do that any more) I was getting more claims and higer tt return, while looking for a better mu stuff I was almost always (apart from some very lucky runs) getting around 15-20% lower tt return. Around 1.5 years ago I was heavy mining Oyster, cause it was a niks heaven and niks mu those days was 170-200%. My tt returns on niks were low (average was 60-65%, while on other stuff it was 87%), but great mu made niks one of the best resources to mine those days. I'm sure all experienced miners have simmilar experiences with the tt return difference between lyst and higher mu stuff. So my question is: will you be mining no-mu-shit (that should improve a bit your tt return), or will you be mining mostly for profit (so for decent mu resources) and you'll be just tracking the tt return while your usual mining trips?
 
Kubroz said:
Good luck with your project - I'm very curious what your results will be.

But there are 2 things I should mention:

1. Many times I've seen you were saying on EF that average mining returns in the long run are around 95% - I've read this as your opinion even long after VU10. What made you change your mind and lower it to 90%?

2. Usually when I was mining so called "lyst fields" (I dont do that any more) I was getting more claims and higer tt return, while looking for a better mu stuff I was almost always (apart from some very lucky runs) getting around 15-20% lower tt return. Around 1.5 years ago I was heavy mining Oyster, cause it was a niks heaven and niks mu those days was 170-200%. My tt returns on niks were low (average was 60-65%, while on other stuff it was 87%), but great mu made niks one of the best resources to mine those days. I'm sure all experienced miners have simmilar experiences with the tt return difference between lyst and higher mu stuff. So my question is: will you be mining no-mu-shit (that should improve a bit your tt return), or will you be mining mostly for profit (so for decent mu resources) and you'll be just tracking the tt return while your usual mining trips?
Click to expand...

Hehe many questions there

Firstly i am fully aware i have been saying 90-95% tt returns even after vu10, the main reason for that i was including data for the last 3 years, so any shift in tt returns over that massive amount of ped is negligable. Hence the reason for this thread, as 60k is not a massive amount and differences can be seen. AAlso since vu10 i have not mined nearly as much as i use to, and this data is from the last 3 months, so i think this is a fair test

As for lyst vs markup stuff, i do not believe your tt returns change depending on what areas you mine. I believe you will get the same with rares as without, but i am not testing area dependant, i mine to profit and that will not change, so bottom line just tracking results from my normal runs, which is all of them

I wanted to create this thread, to give some insight into tt returns in the mining system as it stands now, and how long it takes to get a good % back

I hope that helps

Rgds

Ace
 
Ace Flyster said:
Hehe many questions there

Firstly i am fully aware i have been saying 90-95% tt returns even after vu10, the main reason for that i was including data for the last 3 years, so any shift in tt returns over that massive amount of ped is negligable. Hence the reason for this thread, as 60k is not a massive amount and differences can be seen. AAlso since vu10 i have not mined nearly as much as i use to, and this data is from the last 3 months, so i think this is a fair test

As for lyst vs markup stuff, i do not believe your tt returns change depending on what areas you mine. I believe you will get the same with rares as without, but i am not testing area dependant, i mine to profit and that will not change, so bottom line just tracking results from my normal runs, which is all of them

I wanted to create this thread, to give some insight into tt returns in the mining system as it stands now, and how long it takes to get a good % back

I hope that helps

Rgds

Ace
Click to expand...


Thx for answer - everything's clear for me now.

Hope you'll find many nice ubers during your project what will kick the tt return rate up :cool:
 
Hmm, it looks liike you're assuming that the system is programmed to purposely balance out good luck with bad. At least, this experiment only makes sense in that light

But supposing that each bomb drop is a discrete, independant event, and the result is is not affected by past bomb drops, then you can't expect to make up the deficit from previous bad luck. What you can expect is that -over a very long time- the highs and lows will have diminishing significance and the results will tend towards an average. Which would be the same, in effect, but then you are clearly not giving it a long enough time period. If 60k drops don;t yield an average result, then the extra 10k will only vary all the more wildly.

I don't know how much data it would take to get a reliable figure for % returns. certainly more than one miner can provide. And if we include uber loots, then we would need to have practically all of the miners contibuting data. And if we don't? then the average % will surely be lower than expected,
So here's a petinent question: did those 60k drops include any ubers? If not, that would account for it being low.

I think a lot of us suspect that MA have increased the variance in mining returns. i.e a bigger percentage of the loot pool is going into ubers; which is good luck for some, bad luck for statistical analysts :laugh:

Anyway, thanks for sharing your data. All grist to the mill :) But do include specific data on any ubers you get

jay :)
 
Myself and Stilton were discussing how to test this very thing. The best way we could think of is to get people to track the tt in/out and return % in their sigs here on EF. An individual blog for this is of no use, we need a much bigger sample size ;) (more people with differing spend habits).
 
The supposed 90% return rate has interested me for a while now, I muddle along, but mostly from the occasional good MU drop, which as we all know, comes from other players, and most responses in my thread that were achieving 90% returns seem to be turning in excess of $5000 dollars, some suggested $10000, this seems a ludicrous amount to have to turn in game.

I also have a sneaking suspicion that time is a factor in this, though until I start recording TT in/out I cannot say for sure.

On the bright side, whenever loot is particularly bad, my commando in a browser shooter gets more xp, up to lvl 20 now :)
 
my main problem is that returns seems to spread out over the 3 professions.
I can have a bad month in hunting & go home with a +100% tt return on mining that month. I know ppl will say I get more then I deserve but fuck it..

Unamped mining returns :
January 2010
tt turnover = 12135,65
tt return = 13727,6
113.12%

February 2010
tt turnover = 6869,21
tt return = 6541,79
95.23%

total = 19004.86 ped
return = 20269.36 ped

106.65% tt return.

All unamped & with maxed finders.

Srry I hate mining, always have, always will... but it sure is a nice way to make a small profit when having bad hunting loots ;)
 
das said:
.

Srry I hate mining, always have, always will... but it sure is a nice way to make a small profit when having bad hunting loots ;)
Click to expand...

was always the same for me, if i hunted big mobs for big cash and mined unamped for small cash the bombs often paid me >100 %tt to cover my hunting losses a bit ;)

bad thing is only you didnt get the >100 % without loosing with the big mobs before
 
Dollymaus said:
was always the same for me, if i hunted big mobs for big cash and mined unamped for small cash the bombs often paid me >100 %tt to cover my hunting losses a bit ;)

bad thing is only you didnt get the >100 % without loosing with the big mobs before
Click to expand...

true, good thing is the big mob paid out also :D
 
subscribing..
 
Are you mining on taxed areas?

84% tt return, if 5% taxed land thats 89% return
 
  • Like
Reactions: das
jaywalker said:
Hmm, it looks liike you're assuming that the system is programmed to purposely balance out good luck with bad. At least, this experiment only makes sense in that light

But supposing that each bomb drop is a discrete, independant event, and the result is is not affected by past bomb drops, then you can't expect to make up the deficit from previous bad luck. What you can expect is that -over a very long time- the highs and lows will have diminishing significance and the results will tend towards an average. Which would be the same, in effect, but then you are clearly not giving it a long enough time period. If 60k drops don;t yield an average result, then the extra 10k will only vary all the more wildly.

I don't know how much data it would take to get a reliable figure for % returns. certainly more than one miner can provide. And if we include uber loots, then we would need to have practically all of the miners contibuting data. And if we don't? then the average % will surely be lower than expected,
So here's a petinent question: did those 60k drops include any ubers? If not, that would account for it being low.

I think a lot of us suspect that MA have increased the variance in mining returns. i.e a bigger percentage of the loot pool is going into ubers; which is good luck for some, bad luck for statistical analysts :laugh:

Anyway, thanks for sharing your data. All grist to the mill :) But do include specific data on any ubers you get

jay :)
Click to expand...

Some interesting points here, for me i believe it is all avatar based, and yes i am expecting a biggy to balance things out. But this is the whole point of the thread, to see what returns a single avatar can expect, and i do expect it to average out, at least i hope it does. But at the end of the day it does come down to what you believe. For example i believe all auction costs go back into my personal loot pool. But that is something else.

Either way i believe that the results will be interesting

No ubers in these 60k, biggest was around 300-400 pedder

I will include any ubers for those interested

Norbert said:
Myself and Stilton were discussing how to test this very thing. The best way we could think of is to get people to track the tt in/out and return % in their sigs here on EF. An individual blog for this is of no use, we need a much bigger sample size ;) (more people with differing spend habits).
Click to expand...

It is of course up to you if you wish to follow this or not, for me i find it interesting and in mining when MU's are easy to calulate my TT % return is a matter of big interest. If without ubers i stay around 83% then that will make a big difference to how i mine. Other wise if it goes back up to 90 or 95% returns then i have more options of how i approach mining. Again please unsubscribe if you find it pointless

Wolverine Queen said:
Are you mining on taxed areas?

84% tt return, if 5% taxed land thats 89% return
Click to expand...

Mostly untaxed but some areas will have tax, i would say around 80% untaxed. But that is a guess

Rgds

Ace

And thankyou everyone for reading and supporting
 
Gl Ace!

And btw and im on the same TT-return % as you in mining past month´s
 
gl :)

Mine looked about the same


ce2_miningyay.jpg


sadly it doesn't come near to making up for hunting -ve for the last year : P (or even last 3 months)
 
Interesting results Immortal, thank you for sharing

That biggy helped bring it back up to over 90%, which is what i am hoping for :)

Rgds

Ace
 
gl, and i'm sure you'll get to 95% soon enough :yay:
 
Pre VU10 i was use to minimum 90% returns
Click to expand...
Wow!!! Would be nice to know your secret. Pre VU10 I was getting about 50% returns on mining (including MU). How long did you get that high level of return for? Maybe you were just in the "good" part of the cycle when you took those statistics. Wish I could get 90% returns...
 
davidgr1200 said:
Wow!!! Would be nice to know your secret. Pre VU10 I was getting about 50% returns on mining (including MU). How long did you get that high level of return for? Maybe you were just in the "good" part of the cycle when you took those statistics. Wish I could get 90% returns...
Click to expand...

I would be interested to know total peds spent vs total peds tt returned?

Rgds

Ace
 
davidgr1200 said:
Wow!!! Would be nice to know your secret. Pre VU10 I was getting about 50% returns on mining (including MU). How long did you get that high level of return for? Maybe you were just in the "good" part of the cycle when you took those statistics. Wish I could get 90% returns...
Click to expand...

I guess Ace's secret is actually keeping track instead of going with a feeling. (and sticking to mining as a main profession).
 
Total Bombs: 36008

0 amp, 304 bombs
TT spent this run: 318
TT returns: 216
% this run: 68%

Total TT Spent: 61263
Total TT Returns: 51377
Total TT % return: 83.86

Rgds

Ace
 
Subscribing, gl.

Harmony. said:
I guess Ace's secret is actually keeping track instead of going with a feeling. (and sticking to mining as a main profession).
Click to expand...

Did it ever occured to you that there's no smartass here on EF older than, say, 4 years and that EU has 9 years?
 
Kerham said:
Did it ever occured to you that there's no smartass here on EF older than, say, 4 years and that EU has 9 years?
Click to expand...

Yes, the older then 4 year smart-asses realized there is no sense in arguing with some people and rather spend theyr time in game, progressing and stuff. :)
 
Harmony. said:
I guess Ace's secret is actually keeping track instead of going with a feeling. (and sticking to mining as a main profession).
Click to expand...

:laugh:

I tried keeping records at Ace's suggestion. (Thx Ace)

after a few months of mostly 50% or less returns and way more $$ in than I ever saw back, I realized my gut, my visa, what my ava was worth, the few piddly hours i played compared with what I spent, and what i actually found in claims, my first feeling was right. (Sorry Ace. :laugh: )

I then proceeded to toss the records out the window cause they depresses me to much. Good thing too, cause frankly it's gotten worse since. ;)

Kicker is, it wasn't always like this, pre VU 10 I had some horrible days, but also had some awesome days...but it was measured in days and weeks not months....

I went from always being top 100, many times top 10, to not being able to get better than 50% return 9 times out of 10.

So either :
A) I somehow forgot everything I used to know.
B) Mining changed drastically. (BUt since we got miners raving daily it's never been better, it can't be that, right? :p )
C) My avatar is broken somehow.
D) MA decided to ass r a p e me for fun and profit.

Personally i'd guess "D", but who knows....:laugh:

EDIT: Oh and gl Ace. :D
 
Steve_saber said:
:laugh:

I tried keeping records at Ace's suggestion. (Thx Ace)

after a few months of mostly 50% or less returns and way more $$ in than I ever saw back, I realized my gut, my visa, what my ava was worth, the few piddly hours i played compared with what I spent, and what i actually found in claims, my first feeling was right. (Sorry Ace. :laugh: )

I then proceeded to toss the records out the window cause they depresses me to much. Good thing too, cause frankly it's gotten worse since. ;)

Kicker is, it wasn't always like this, pre VU 10 I had some horrible days, but also had some awesome days...but it was measured in days and weeks not months....

I went from always being top 100, many times top 10, to not being able to get better than 50% return 9 times out of 10.

So either :
A) I somehow forgot everything I used to know.
B) Mining changed drastically. (BUt since we got miners raving daily it's never been better, it can't be that, right? :p )
C) My avatar is broken somehow.
D) MA decided to ass r a p e me for fun and profit.

Personally i'd guess "D", but who knows....:laugh:

EDIT: Oh and gl Ace. :D
Click to expand...

I am sorry to hear that, i had hoped that our pm conversations helped, evidently not. If you want i can send you an empty copy of my spreadsheets, quite easy to use

Anyways, i guess you don't want to track anymore, very difficult if things are so bad, but i wish you all the best in EU bud

Rgds

Ace
 
heh gl to you bud...go score a huge ath mate. :)

Sorry I butted in here...make it 120% or better return. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top