Yes, 7 to 8 = 80% and 8 to 9 = 70%
or is that not what you mean?
Yes, 7 to 8 = 80% and 8 to 9 = 70%
or is that not what you mean?
ok then i will have to recalculate the numbers they are a off by a little bit, if somone could go through and figure out the percent chance for each star level and post it i will recalculate the averages, the method should still be accurate though.
i was going on the assumption that the % chance of success went down by 5% each time (Gems used constant)
i would do this myself but i haven't gotten my star levels very high yet.
edit: oh that is the percent chance on that table nevermind i had never fully understood the first half of that table before now
i will update it tomorrow with percentages based on that table
Last edited by DarkhoundDave; 08-05-2010 at 11:22 PM.
"Exact" was a mis-statement on my part that poorly communicated my intent. Let me try to do a better job here. We're dealing with a probability. While we cannot guarantee success, we ought to be able to derive a point at which we have a high probability of success. This was the goal that I set out to achieve. Nobody likes to attempt a high level star, and then fail to get back to a similar level. Ideally, we'd like to know approximate number of gems to ensure a high probability of success. It is one thing to calculate the average. It is quite another thing to provide concrete suggestions on what to do with that average, as an on-the-ground-solution to real-gaming situations.
Also, my calculations are only incomplete on the forums because I didn't have the time to run them fully for the forum. I also fully admitted that I spent hours running the numbers weeks ago and that I tossed the paper during the intervening time as well. I learned enough to suit my own purposes and didn't give it a second thought until this thread. I'd rather not have to, but I suppose I could run all of the numbers again and present them here, though it is a bit labor intensive and I've got other things I should be doing.
And thanks to Woldere for confirming my earlier comment on percentages. I'll admit, the 10% adjustment from level 8-10 surprised me too when I first noted it. That's the only stretch that doesn't follow the -5% rule.
I guess I was too curious about your numbers and ran them ahead of time to compare. Sorry, I'm not good with formatting tables, but here's what I've got:
Levels 1-8 are the same since the drop is 5%.
Level 9: 73.21 D / 21.26 F
Level 10: 122.01 D / 42.1 F
Level 11: 221.85 D / 83.82 F
Level 12: 443.7 D / 175.63 F
Level 13: 985.01 D / 399.19 F
Level 14: 2191.15 D / 895.99 F
Level 15 4869.23 D / 1999.99 F
I suppose that much of the animus of my post stemmed from looking at the number of gems at levels 10-15 and knowing they were off by a large margin. I did not, however, expect that the percent success would account for as much as it did. These numbers now sync extremely well with my own numbers, and all discrepancies can basically be accounted for by the way that I rounded.
Last edited by AbstractAngel; 08-27-2010 at 08:47 AM.
5k D and 2k F avg for 1 piece to get to 15? lol... what is that for a full set x14? 100,000 cts to buy all the gems to get to a full set to 15? lol,
IDK bout you guys but lvl 13 full set seems obtainable but beyond that >.<
Last edited by Lurker of NA1; 08-06-2010 at 09:49 AM.
Using the above numbers, 63300 D, 26000 F. That's 115300 cents to buy a full set from scratch.
Level 12-13 seems pretty reasonable for someone who only farms, but doesn't buy any gems. This is about where I am at and I haven't purchased any gems.
Gems drop pretty frequently, so the real cost is time. Unfortunately, I calculate at 50 gems per day, it would take 60 months of farming to reach the average number of gems needed for a full set of level 15 gear. Doing 100 gems per day cuts this to 30 months, but I think most players are going to attrition out of the game before this point. Unfortuantely, more than half of the cost is going from 14 to 15, and more than 3/4 of it is going from 13-15, so simply farming enough gems to get yourself to level 13 isn't going to put a big dent in the amount you'd have to purchase to get your star levels to 15 in a reasonable amount of time.
All in all, good post.
I recalculated and got the same results as x-calibur, first post is now up to date
All 13 is pretty damn effective once your at the point the upgrades are great but in terms of combat at 13 you get a lot of the magic things happen around that 800 attack mark.
Spawn- AgeII Na13 - Massacre Founder
Every one of your enemies has a weakness, you only have to find it, Unless you find your self facing me, were it shall be your weakness that leads to your demise - Spawn.
I wrote a macro in excel to simulate the gem upgrade rules.
The summary is first, explanation after for those that want it.
I simulated 1000 attempts for each upgrade, for each available choice (lvl 12 to 15 based on 100 attempts only to reduce runtime). This info is therefore based on around 100k simulations.
The optimal path is 1D,1D,1D,4D,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F
However, the optimal path creates a backlog of delicate gems, unless you are buying flawless to supplement what you have collected.
therefore collectors should follow - 1D,1D,1D,4D,4D,4(D/F),4(D/F),4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F,4F
key statements
1. I taught myself to write in VBA excel from a book, if you can plough through it (good luck!) and think there is mistake in the code please say.
2. If you get a pile up of delicate gems, use them up on lvl 4 to 5, lvl 5 to 6 and if you have a ton of them, even lvl 6 to 7... or buy flawless to even up the ratio.
3. Although the bonuses at low star levels are really low, cost benefit analysis shows it is ALWAYS better to get all your gear at the same level before trying for the next level (ring and charm is different as the benefit is double for these items - see table below.)
4. Don't get demoralised by a long string of failures, follow the maths and you will save gems.
5. I think the auto upgrades use 4 gems all the time? if so, they waste gems so don't use it. If you do use it, switch to flawless at lvl 4 to 5 unless you have a backlog of delicate.
As you can see, a full star set at level 15 will cost you around $10k !!! :/
It is interesting to compare my table with DarkhoundDave's. I predict the average upgrade from 0 to 15 to cost 1,781D and 3,218F. This would cost a buyer 8,217 game cents (1781+(3218*2)). DarkhoundDave's upgrade from 0 to 15 would cost a buyer 8,869 cents (4869 +(2,000*2)). But the ratio is closer to 1:1 for DarkhoundDave. Buyers should buy only flawless and follow my path. Collectors (like me!) should move towards DarkhoundDave's path according to how many delicates they have in the bank
The confidence interval is a measure of the spread of the sample. The average +/- the confidence interval gives the range at which 95% of the sample succeeds. For example on the upgrade from level 0 to 1, the average is 1.5 and the confidence interval is 0.5. This means that 95% of you will succeed by using between 1 (1.5-0.5) and 2 (1.5+ 0.5) gems (given rounding errors).
The more attempts you try, the smaller the confidence interval becomes. This is because the standard deviation of the sample reduces as the sample size increases. However I based the confidence intervals on the standard deviation in just 10 attempts because it is unlikely anyone has the gems to try 1,000 times. I should probably base it on 13 attempts because that is the number of items in the workshop, but I can't be arsed to run the figures again.
Say you wanted to upgrade a single piece of gear from lvl 0 to lvl 13. It would cost you an average of 334D and 600F. However, a lucky 5% will succeed at 186D, 343F or less, and an unlucky 5% will have to use 482D, 856F or more.
Another way to think of these numbers is how many gems to have spare before trying the next level. If you have a piece at lvl 13 and want to try for 14, it will be annoying to drop to lvl 0 and have no gems left. To be 50% sure you can get back up to lvl 13 have 334D and 600F in reserve, to be 95% sure, have 482D and 856F in reserve.
The cost benefit columns show you that each successive level cost more gems per unit bonus. Ring and charm are different because you get twice the benefit for these items. To work out how much you should upgrade the ring and charm before working on the next level on your main gear, I doubled the cost/ benefit for ring and charm and sorted the results in order of cost benefit. Results are in the table below.Therefore upgrade gear according to the table below. In another post, someone had put in a column 'benefit from risk' and the numbers go up for each level. Do not be fooled by that table if you have seen it, the risk is not properly accounted for - benefit per gem actually goes down per star level.
Using the simulator
If you want to give it a whirl then download the excel spreadsheet, enable macros and have a look. If you want to see the code, I have not locked it. Just hit alt+F11 to open visual basic from excel. On the first sheet are parameters you can change. If attempting a high level upgrade it is STRONGLY SUGGESTED that you reduce the number of attempts from 1000 to 100 or 10 as run times can get very long.
Type in the path you want to try on sheet 1 by entering the number of delicate or flawless gems to use for each upgrade. Now choose the level upgrade you want to attempt (e.g. 0 to 7 , 3 to 4). Now choose the number of attempts you want to do (more attempts = more accurate average but longer run time). Now hit the big red button. A message box will appear (eventually) and tell you the results.
hope it works for you
MisterDave
Last edited by daveholmes; 08-26-2010 at 04:29 PM. Reason: couple of typos
Bookmarks