How to analyze loot

[Kolobok]

Originally Posted by falkao

I do not exclude those cases. When I talk about profiting, I do not include markup. That's another matter.

Here I don't speak about markup. This thread:

The economics of frugality: an experiment

shows that in general payout for eco hunt after amp nerf is more or less balanced with expenditures.

[falkao]

Originally Posted by Kolobok

Here I don't speak about markup. This thread:

The economics of frugality: an experiment

shows that in general payout for eco hunt after amp nerf is more or less balanced with expenditures.

thx for sharing, that's exactly the other matter I was referring to. If you include markup and your hunting is in some way eco, you'll see a nice profit.

Atm I do estimate mean return as not lower than 70%. Including a markup of in mean 140% you'll end up in breaking even. I guess the final retun will be higher than 80% but we have to wait till its confirmed with data.

So if everything is random one can expect this. However, this also implies that there will be losers and winners. Thats the randomness. The grouping effect might correct this, so that a regular playing ava might expect the estimated return with a high prob. That's all what I'm speaking about. Itree is the best example for this.

[buckaroobanzai]

Originally Posted by falkao

Atm I do estimate mean return as not lower than 70%.

It depends of course on which weapon you're using and with which skills, but I think average TT return is significantly higher than this for everybody hunting in a reasonable way.

[Kaiser]

Ummm, if the analysis carried any wieght, wouldn't I have heard of you before due to your HoF's and globals etc.?

[Doer]

Originally Posted by Kaiser

Ummm, if the analysis carried any wieght, wouldn't I have heard of you before due to your HoF's and globals etc.?

I suggest you actually read through the thread so you don't come out sounding like an imbecile.

[falkao]

Originally Posted by buckaroobanzai

It depends of course on which weapon you're using and with which skills, but I think average TT return is significantly higher than this for everybody hunting in a reasonable way.

that's correct Buck.
Unfortunately I can state only the lower limit atm due to lack of data. The prob of Loot from >=c3 has a 95% confidence interval ranging from 2% to 8%. Therefore, when using 2% as a reference, mean return is about 70%, with 2.5% as a reference, it will be 78%. As you see, a small increment of the freq. of loot from c3 and above leads to a quite higher return.

Moreover, since we noticed global grouping, we need a large sample size to be sure what the prob. for >=c3 loot is and it seems that there might be mob differences, so that in one mob rate for c3 is lower but c4 higher or vice versa.

In my hogglo run, I had 9 globals out of 101 kills, then a gap till 148, so that out of 159 kills I've got 11 globals. If the first 101 kills are used to estimate the global rate I would get 9%, whereas with the 157 it is 7%. Furthermore, c3 loot was nearly missing, so that c4 rate must be higher, what I indeed observed.

[falkao]

Originally Posted by Kolobok

Here I don't speak about markup. This thread:

The economics of frugality: an experiment

shows that in general payout for eco hunt after amp nerf is more or less balanced with expenditures.

Red has some suggestions about that gaming-loot-mindset

at least it helps to not suffer that much.

[ForrestPark]

Would one of the next steps be to work out where the server borders are?

Surely it's a possibility that different servers might hold different loot? Worth ruling out anyway....

The borders of different servers have been noticed here but I'm not sure if anyone has more info......

[falkao]

Originally Posted by kalanen

How about universal "uptime" and grouping? It should be easy to dig out using existing global data.

For example how long "holes" occur between 6am and 10am (MA time). And those mobs that global at silent times, tend to have higher peaks during "uptime".

here what I've found so far:

Per hour I did calc how many glbls have there been per mob Nh_Mob, and per Ava on that mob (Nh_MobAva). Further I did calc how many glbs we had per mob per day (N_Mob).

To get hot hours per Mob I used P_Mob = Nh_Mob/N_Mob. So the proportion of glbls per hour on a specific day in relation to the total number of globals on that day and mob.

I defined a hot hour to have P_Mob >= 10%.

To get hot phases per Ava I used P_Ava = Nh_MobAva/Nh_Mob. So this gives me the proportion on how many globals one ava did get related to all globals in that hour.

I defined a hot hour for an Ava as P_Ava >= 10%.

To see if there is a relation to loot I did use the median and do get the following:

edit: only those hours are including in which at least 5 avas did global on that sepcific mob. This was necessary to get a reasonable p for ava.


Only Aurli

P_Mob >= 10%
		Median
P_Ava >= 10%	118.8
P_Ava < 10%	96.5
p < .001 (U-Test)

P_Mob < 10%
		Median
P_Ava >= 10%	108
P_Ava < 10%	96
p < .001 (U-Test)

All mobs

P_Mob >= 10%
		Median
P_Ava >= 10%	79.5
P_Ava < 10%	77
p = .004 (U-Test)


P_Mob < 10%
		Median
P_Ava >= 10%	77
P_Ava < 10%	77
p < .001 (U-Test)

The difference in median loot between hot and not hot Ava phases are statistically significant.
There is also a sig. diff between hot Mob phases (p < .001) when the ava is also hot, but not when the ava is dry (p=.683).
If I do the same for all mobs, then I don't get any difference between hot and not hot mob phases.


So what does the mean. If an Ava get's many globals per hour on a specific mob, then his loot is higher as in off phases of the same mob. If the mob itself is hot or not does not show any higher loot.

So my assumption, that there is an intra ava gets a further boost.

Please review carefully the data. Interpretation is not that easy as it seems.

[kalanen]

Originally Posted by falkao

So what does the mean. If an Ava get's many globals per hour on a specific mob, then his loot is higher as in off phases of the same mob. If the mob itself is hot or not does not show any higher loot.

So my assumption, that there is an intra ava gets a further boost.

As partial counter assumption I'd describe it "unleashing the full potential". Finding "hot" area is rarely a problem, but hitting the peak is completely another thing. Besides "capping" sorta fits better in this model than "boosting", since skillls have value too, or what do you think? That would be the natural way to adchieve 1 = (1-decay_on_the_house).

Originally Posted by falkao

Please review carefully the data. Interpretation is not that easy as it seems.

sec... :P