Quote:
Originally Posted by Leona
Yes, the "close to 100% tt-return thingy" is where most people disagree. Actually just had an discussion in socchat  .
It is easy to explain though. Let's agree on some terms first:
Active costs: Everything that decays direct to damage. Ammo, weapon decay and amp decay for an ranged hunter in example.
Passive Costs: Fap, Armor "basedecay" (w/o L markup)
Lack of Economy Costs: If you use an unmaxed weapon
Markup Costs: All markup you "decay" on your run, your L gun, L amp, L Fap, L Armor, L whatever
Extra Expenses: Teleport costs, LA-taxes...
So what i claim is: Assuming you hunt with an maxed weapon, on the long run you get back 100% of your Active Costs plus an unknown part of your Passive Costs.
To me it seems that the system keeps an % of the Passive Costs. That would be pretty much how MA claims that it works, surprise surprise. 
The Markup Costs, MA's part of the Passive Costs and the Extra Expenses however, it is your job as hunter to earn it back by markup in loot. |
I think you are missing my point.
I am saying that according to my experience there is no difference at all between what you call active and passive costs as they relate to total tt return over time. Else I loot better than 100% on active cost (on the long run counting globals into the avg)...
I have high passive costs (focus chip, tp, fap, scanner) and low active cost (over 1 yr active playing and only ~1450 marksmanship) because I aim to be a more scientifically skilled avatar vs a Rambo. This style gives me lumpy returns as opposed to flatter ones of a very eco-minded hunter who maximizes damage out and minimizes damage in, but I agree that we all get about the same return in the long run.
You didn't answer my one question directly.
Is your passive cost at about 8% of your active cost (accounting for the difference between my 92% and your ~100%)?
I think that your 100% return on "active cost" is incidental and a result of the arbitrary division you made of "active" and "passive" costs as they relate to tt return. I do agree tho, that dividing your costs as you have and minimizing passive costs will give a flatter return rate.
For a small bankroll that is a good thing, but if you have a big one... it
might be better to go for the hofs.