Upkeep Maths

[Pukudo]

You are missing the point mate. You are trying to make something very comlicated into a simple equasion and that doesn't work.
As i said.. sit back and wait how it works out =)

I have not seen the code and the original calculations that determine the true values and neither have you afaik. We just do not have the complete picture unless chadz really posts all the formulas , wich he has not and probably wont.

Hey newtons laws are basic. and we design complex systems around them. Probability isn't and never was an exact science but rather shows you and overall projection when plugged in with lots of data.

Awesome, I was thinking about trying to work this out myself but wasn't sure how. I dont understand what your trying to achieve with SD in your other post tho.

even though in theory anyone should be able to upkeep 47.5k with ease [(1.9x20)x25], it definitely does feel alot harder than that ingame. I was using <20k gear for a long time about 1 million exp's worth and only recently started to make any profit. and I see 5 items breaking at once fairly regulary, which should be very unlikely. so I have a feeling the numbers we have been given are wrong.

Standard deviation is used to predict the variance of where people will sit below and above the mean. So you would be able to predict that the top 10% of players (do the random nature of luck and skill) would be able to maintain x Gold of equipment. ... It ahh just doesn't work in this example at all...

Now but a bigger issue? I'm not sure about this 4% thing? is this a 4% chance that a Random item will break? Because this could be abused by spawning with low end items then dropping them! Or is it rolled for every item?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

The in right side of the graph is ment to have the same area as the left side of the graph.
Where as the x axis shows the Avg. Multiplier, The y Axis is ment to be an indication of the probablity. The area below the line shows (or is ment to if made properly) the amount of people..

[Dekiri]

I still believe you are working with the wrong numbers. It does seem that we lack the exact formulas still. I am quite familiar with mathematical theories and your basic ideas are alright , no worries about that. You just lack the correct formulas and not just the stuff i meantioned that you don't take into account.
I have played quite a lot and the numbers you end up on just don't feel right.
We will have to sit back and watch how it plays out or get the correct formulas from chadz or there is no point in calculating anything.

4% chance on an item breaking could mean that every item gets a 4% roll each time you hit the 1 minute mark OR 4% added to the chance of each item breaking (for example 20% for a 5 minute round) OR 4% that something breaks each minute displayed at the end OR 4% added to something breaking (wich is unlikely since so many different things seem to break in some rounds)

I think (and i just assume since i lack the data to be sure) that it is 4% added to each items break chance for every minute and that is calculated at the end of the round. Wich would mean that in a 5 minute round you have a 20% chance for each item to break and need repairs.. wich still seems to low a chance considering how many repairs are needed in some cases. But then again we perceive the negative a lot stronger then the positive in memory so it might just be the correct formula for item repairs.

4% chance that a random item breaks is extremly unlikely, since having to repair 5 or more items is not that rare and rounds don't last long enough to make that likely.

oh yea.. and you are still missing my point i think ....

[Vicious666]

problem with upkeep is that upkeep is stable of course

if  you do 1000 round


not 50 or 100 or 200.

becouse on 50 or 200,    you can have even a 150  lose streak

[Pukudo]

What I can say is that the changes from. .200 -> 0.201.
Amount to 1/3rd of the cost before hand.(theoretical)
From a factor of .006 to .002 By the cost.

I'm not supporting or condemning the first formulas.

But people shouldn't consider them to be absolute fact.

They don't seem that wrong to me. And it would be hard to tell anyway unless you compare your data to other peoples.

As for the formula... It's breakable.. People will just need to do some experimentation.

Get Person A to wear only 1 item.
and Person B to  wear all of Them.

Record: Number of resource events, and number of items breaking.
Comparing data from Person A and person B over say 20-30 rounds. Would make it possible to able deduce if it rolls based on the amount of items.

Then using the number of events E and the number of items breaking included 0 events.(N)
It should be possible to work out a relationship.

However I'm unable to collect such data so I'll leave that to someone else...

The First Post Account for a scenario where all the items are rolled for individually.
I donno I'd give it a 70% chance.. Its hard to say because I have a problem with decay working at the moment.

[Helrekkr]

The thing is, people don't do averages. They play a 10 or 20 round session and then look at the results.

I've had sessions where I wore 50k gear and almost nothing every broke, netting me a boost of gold even while losing.
I've also had sessions where I wore a more conservative 20k gearset and I lost a few thousand gold.

If everybody were to store and average their numbers, they'd probably be a lot less shocked and annoyed by the repair system.
Maybe chadz could implement a small statistic window in the crpg website that tracks this stuff so people don't have to come up with crazy statements like "I lost all my gold and sold all my plate and I can't even afford a pithfork anymore!".

[Pukudo]

There is no need to track this stuff. I think he should just post the formulas show the math. Everyone can then agree that it works. Then anyone who comes here whinging can be shunned off.

What is his current statement on the Average Gear Score?
Because given that he changed it from.
20% cost at 3% chance.
to
5% cost at 4% chance.

Thats a rather large factor change.

[Ganon]

There is no need to track this stuff. I think he should just post the formulas show the math. Everyone can then agree that it works. Then anyone who comes here whinging can be shunned off.

What is his current statement on the Average Gear Score?
Because given that he changed it from.
20% cost at 3% chance.
to
5% cost at 4% chance.

Thats a rather large factor change.

You're missing that the 20/3 was for losing teams only while the 5/4 was for both teams, regardless of winning or losing and yesterday it got changed again.

[Vicious666]

factor is that you cant base   upkeep on random shit factor

becouse random stuff become   "trustable" only             on big numbers  1000+

for a normal guy who play lets say    40 round (8 maps) /day can happen to        upkeep 3-4 items for round           on   30 losing round streak/40,     and sink all his money, of course if he will play another  10 day  40 round day(400), he will be get balanced ,  (maybe)  or he can get unlucky, give up the game for frustration and never play the other 600 round that will make him make money.

[Pukudo]

You're missing that the 20/3 was for losing teams only while the 5/4 was for both teams, regardless of winning or losing and yesterday it got changed again.

Oh yea good point!

[Leshma]

48000 isn't too high if you're a cav. But since not every map is cavalry map and sometimes on the cav friendly map you want to play as infantry I'll say that 48k gives everyone an equal chance. You can be black armor knight if you want but without a horse and not every round (change to mail sometimes, if won't hurt you much if you're skilled a bit). You can ride a good horse in chanmail everytime or you can ride a crappy horse in plate. You can even ride an elephant in black armor but not every round.

 I think that chadz balanced well this upkeep thingy, I personally wouldn't change anything at all.

[Banok]

I agree and said in the OP that the system is too random. although its not a major problem just get some spare cash.

@pukudo yeah I get SD but personally not that interested in predicting what % of player can earn what, just like to know the minimum you can upkeep to shut up whiners and so I can avoid losing gold on average. its assumed that better players will be able to upkeep more than the average.

[Armpit_Sweat]

Now i am not very good at math now, its been almost 10 years since i finished college. But i came to the similar numbers, even though i made calculations before i even opened this thread and used a different "method"...

Here is my, practical example of the math theory:

I bought my gear before i could wear it ( used most of my skillpoints on AGI after the patch ), so i saved some gold, and could afford to lose it even with the worst odds. So... My total gear cost was around 37000, and after 20+ hours in-game, i have gained 5.000 gold. Basicaly its breaking even for me.
37k is far from 48k, but i guess, if one has 200-300k to "gamble" with - it will last for a good amount of time... If you only have 10.000 left when you buy your top 48k gear - you might get unlucky, and be naked in no time.

48.000 is not that much. I have a heirloomed 1h ( 6.5k ), a heavy board shield, heraldic chainmail, chainmail boots, chainmail gloves and a plated 50+ armor helmet ( + a great maul as my back-up weapon ). As you can see - its a very medium armor set. Both of my weapons and shield - are pricey for what they are.

I would have to drop something, if i want to get a good horse. Or a siege crossbow with high end bolts... Etc.

48k is actually not that stupid. I still hate the patch, but it is starting to make sense...