Upkeep Maths

[Banok]

 EDIT: just saw this post from chadz so my maths must be a bit off

There was a minor update an hour ago on EU and NA, reducing the break chance for the winning team a bit.

4% break per min,  minimum earned 50 gold per min, 5% repair cost of broken items.

okay so...

break 100/4 = 25
repair 100/5 = 20
(50goldx25)x20= 25000

25000 gold the minimum cost you can use without losing money assuming you lose 100% of the time and only get 50 per min.
Asumming you win half the time you multiplier would be 1.9 on average (thanks pukudo), which means 47.5k gear. I am talking in AVERAGES, sometimes you will have bad luck always have 20k or so spare gold for rainy days.

47500 is too much for an just average player imo. I think the system is too random, and often totally dependant on how your team plays not how you play. It would be nice if even if you lost you got more gold for doing well.

Amount of items matter?
so a 10000 gold item costs (10000/25)/20= 20 gold per minute to upkeep.
1x 25000 gold item is 50 gold per min
25 x 1000 gold item would be still 50 gold per min

so no number of items I dont think matters, just total cost.

[Banok]

whoops the quote and modify buttons are in the wrong places!

[Ganon]

The second part of your math is wrong but i'm not going over that again, just so you know, the limit of sustainable equipment is in place for ALL players, there are no average, low or high players. All can afford the same. That's another problem with upkeep, removing character differentiation. You might think 37500 is too much, but some characters use more items (take a 1hsword/shield with trowing weapons, a average template for example), and once you make good setups for what the real upkeep limit is (48500) everyone will just use that. In native mode players will look more different.

[Banok]

try to back up claims with explanations, your post doesn't really make any sense. upkeep makes there much more differentiation since before everyone just went plate. how is that second maths part wrong? real upkeep is 48500, for what?

[Vicious666]

try to back up claims with explanations, your post doesn't really make any sense. upkeep makes there much more differentiation since before everyone just went plate. how is that second maths part wrong? real upkeep is 48500, for what?

everyone where?  if only in my clan  from 20 ppl only 3 where using plate  LOL

[Pukudo]

Assuming a 50% chance to win.
The probably of your multiplier at any one point is as follows!
x1:50%
x2:25%
x3:12.5%
x4:6.25%
x5:6.25% (this is because as a cap it will loop back onto its own multiplier)
Therefore:
The Average multiplier is 1.9375

Watch this space for some pretty graphs.

[Ganon]

With the recent patch (see the 0.201 announcement thread) things have changed a bit, losing teams get penalized a little and winning ones have a smaller chance, i have not seen the numbers behind those yet. From a few rounds played today things seemed to stay the same overall or maybe upkeep has increased a bit, now winning or losing matters more, i had even 6 items break on one round i lost. We need to correct the math to calculate the new sustainable equip value.

[Dekiri]

this "everyone has the same chance" bullshit is really getting on my nerves...
Have you guys played the game lately?  For some reason it is usually 1 or 2 kills that decide the individual rounds and that shows how much impact a single player can have with a few kills.
Meaning that you can VERY MUCH influence the chance to win a particular round and it will have a big impact on your maximum upkeep costs if you play well , hardly die and kill a lot.
Not to mention the fact that winning will also reduce the chance of stuff breaking slightly.
I would claim that any average player can easily upkeep 30k of equip.

[Pukudo]

I've been unable to apply any Probability distribution that makes sense so far..
The standard deviation works out to be 1.183

Which would mean that 68.2% of people would have an average multiplier of 0.7545 -> 3.1205

Under the sustainable 25000 gold per x1 multiplier model. Which is a logical one.

That would mean 16% of people would be able to sustain over 78000 gold..

The issue is I think that you can't apply Standard deviation to this example.. as if projects people out of the Limits of the range 1->5

However with the Avg calculated. 1.94 * 25000 the Average sustainable amount seems to be 48500. This is really to high!


----edit---

I would claim that any average player can easily upkeep 30k of equip.

This is a mathematical discussion.

[slothscott]

+1 48,500 is too high.

[Dekiri]

----edit---This is a mathematical discussion.

No its not, since you lack data to make it one. You are ignoring factors that are part of the equasion making it absolutly pointless.
It is also not a "mathematical discussion", because its fifth grade maths you are talking about here and calling it a mathematical discussion is really a bit much for that.

edit: just so noone cries about me not backing up my point:
You can't even start with 50g/min because it doesn't work out that way. The first gold "tick" is about 20 to 30 seconds into the round and the last tick is hard to pin down, because of the randomness of fights ending. It might be less then a minute overall or more --> we would need statistical data for that. If you now think this is an unimportant point then look closer and calculate how many gold ticks per round you will get and how long rounds take on average, especially taking the fact into the equasion that you have servers with fewer players, thus making the individual rounds shorter or more random. Then take siege mode.. where you will have different chances for defenders and attackers depending on the map you play on. Not to mention that you have this same problem with the battle maps. Then you can start on thinking about autobalance and joining ... people who only play for half an hour at a time have a much better chance to enter crap teams since when you initially join a server you will end up on the team that lost the last round in most cases ( also would need more data to really look at that factor)...... and so on... there are so many things manipulating your "mathematical diskussion" wich you just ignore, so your calculation is pointless.
The only thing that will solve this problem is not a mathematical equasion but collecting data and seeing how it will work out once the extremly rich and older players have used up all their horded gold. There are players with so much gold they can probably play a month as full tincan without running out of money.
If you just started playing the whole thing feels very balanced and not "to easy".
And let us also not forget that since we are talking about balance here it is not enough to calculate the possible upkeep. Things like people buying and selling equipment also have to be considered if you want to make a proper point. Loosing 1/3 of the value of any item bought when you sell it also counts a lot, not to mention people collecting different sets of gear, wich also takes gold form the "economy".

Sit back and wait and look at how the balance works out over time and stop trying to create arguments with pseudofancy maths.

[Pukudo]

Ramble Ramble Ramble.

Sit back and wait and look at how the balance works out over time and stop trying to create arguments with pseudofancy maths.

You don't need to plug in every absolute condition and please refer to my first post where I have assumed a  50% chance of victory.
First of all the chance of an item breaking from what has been told. is directly prepositional to the amount of resource ticks so the length of time becomes irrelevant!
Its ment to be a 4% chance per tick.

If you want to plug in ABSOLUTELY EVERY CONDITION then you will find that true randomness doesn't even EXIST EVER.

As autobalance is designed to work on a 50/50 chance it will be safe enough to asume it does its job well..

As I said Amusing a 50% of victory the average exp modifier is 1.94.. That is a MATHEMATICAL STATISTIC.

[Dekiri]

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.

[Ganon]

+1 48,500 is too high.

No, go play native pls kthxbye

[Banok]

Assuming a 50% chance to win.
The probably of your multiplier at any one point is as follows!
x1:50%
x2:25%
x3:12.5%
x4:6.25%
x5:6.25% (this is because as a cap it will loop back onto its own multiplier)
Therefore:
The Average multiplier is 1.9375

Watch this space for some pretty graphs.

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.