EVE Search - What happened with Reverse Engineering?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

What happened with Reverse Engineering?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:12:00 - [1] - Quote I'm trying to get what happened with reverse engineering in the last couple of weeks. For example I got only 3 Accelerated Ejection Bay BPCs from 60 reverse engineering works made with skills 5-5-4 from Intact Ancient Relics and it caused me to lose money on this according to total cost of each BPC. As for now - my chance on reverse engineering is is like 40% and it makes me cry, because I'm just loosing money. I'm wondering - will CCP 'repair' tech III reserch/production or it will be left unprofitable/low-profitable thing? Yours sincere, Liza Hawkeye
ElQuirko Protus Correction Facility Inc. 777	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:13:00 - [2] - Quote I'd like to reverse engineer my railguns and then combine the firing mechanism with Quafe Ultra and narcotics in order to wreak merry hell in Jita. CISPA - Readin' your secret corptheft mails since 2012
Corina Jarr Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built 875	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:16:00 - [3] - Quote The nature of any chance based mechanic... You could, though unlikely, try 100 times and fail each time even with a 99% chance of success.
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:17:00 - [4] - Quote Corina Jarr wrote: The nature of any chance based mechanic... You could, though unlikely, try 100 times and fail each time even with a 99% chance of success. I'm running hundreds of reverse engineering jobs. And I'm not so unlucky. It really seems that the chance was halved by two and chance for a good BPC by 4 or smth.
Surfin's PlunderBunny Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1579	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:19:00 - [5] - Quote Corina Jarr wrote: The nature of any chance based mechanic... You could, though unlikely, try 100 times and fail each time even with a 99% chance of success. That could only happen if the chance of success was 99% with each try
Corina Jarr Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built 875	Posted - 2012.06.24 18:22:00 - [6] - Quote Liza Hawkeye wrote: Corina Jarr wrote: The nature of any chance based mechanic... You could, though unlikely, try 100 times and fail each time even with a 99% chance of success. I'm running hundreds of reverse engineering jobs. And I'm not so unlucky. It really seems that the chance was halved by two and chance for a good BPC by 4 or smth. You don't under stand. Lets say that the chance of success for one is 50%. Out of 1M, you would expect that half would succeed. This however is only one out of millions of outcomes. You could fail millions of times even with a 50% chance of success. You could also succeed millions of times. This is why chance is bad.
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.24 20:44:00 - [7] - Quote I understand your position, but I'm not bad in statistics (I'm and economist) and I totally see that considering the number of jobs I'm doing - the average chance of getting BPC became much lower. And the chance of getting a good BPC is awfully low now. Thats made me to post that thread to get an answer - did CCP change smth with reverse engineering chance or only I'm suffering from my bad luck or smth.
Lexmana Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 589	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:00:00 - [8] - Quote Liza Hawkeye wrote: I understand your position, but I'm not bad in statistics Then you would know that 60 is not a very large sample. Try a (couple of) thousand more and come back with your result.
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2048	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:01:00 - [9] - Quote Liza Hawkeye wrote: I understand your position, but I'm not bad in statistics (I'm and economist) and I totally see that considering the number of jobs I'm doing - the average chance of getting BPC became much lower. And the chance of getting a good BPC is awfully low now. Thats made me to post that thread to get an answer - did CCP change smth with reverse engineering chance or only I'm suffering from my bad luck or smth. If your a statistician, tell me, would you assume the coin is unfair if you see a run of 40 heads when you flip a coin 400 times? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:14:00 - [10] - Quote RubyPorto wrote: Liza Hawkeye wrote: I understand your position, but I'm not bad in statistics (I'm and economist) and I totally see that considering the number of jobs I'm doing - the average chance of getting BPC became much lower. And the chance of getting a good BPC is awfully low now. Thats made me to post that thread to get an answer - did CCP change smth with reverse engineering chance or only I'm suffering from my bad luck or smth. If your a statistician, tell me, would you assume the coin is unfair if you see a run of 40 heads when you flip a coin 400 times? Considering that coin can give 3 results: top, bottom and edge, and we don't count physics in it - then the chance of each result is: 100%/3=33.3%. Everybody agree with it. Then if we flip the coin for 400 times - we're waiting for the result of 133.3 tops, 133.3 bottoms and 133.3 edges. If in our experiment results are 40 tops, 200 bottoms and 60 edges then the only thing we got from the result is that we did not enough tries. I understand your position, but I'm still sure (even if it's against logic and is only empirically thoughts) that chances were reduced. Currently I'm having material for 120 more jobs - when I'll finish them (tommorow I think) - I'll present you results.
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2048	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:16:00 - [11] - Quote By the way, how many total BPCs did you get from your 60 runs? And what's your actual calculated %chance? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:25:00 - [12] - Quote RubyPorto wrote: By the way, how many total BPCs did you get from your 60 runs? And what's your actual calculated %chance? According to the formula: Reverse_Chance = Base_Chance * (1 + (0.01 * Reverse_Engineering_Skill_Level)) * (1 + (0.1 * (Datacore_1_Skill_Level + Datacore_2_Skill_Level))) And base chance of the intact relic (40%) and my skills it's 5-5-4 chance must be 79.8%, but my yield was 23 BPCs and only 8 of them are normal to produce.
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2048	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:32:00 - [13] - Quote Liza Hawkeye wrote: RubyPorto wrote: By the way, how many total BPCs did you get from your 60 runs? And what's your actual calculated %chance? According to the formula: Reverse_Chance = Base_Chance * (1 + (0.01 * Reverse_Engineering_Skill_Level)) * (1 + (0.1 * (Datacore_1_Skill_Level + Datacore_2_Skill_Level))) And base chance of the intact relic (40%) and my skills it's 5-5-4 chance must be 79.8%, but my yield was 23 BPCs and only 8 of them are normal to produce. 23/60 is easily within the likely outcomes. Same with 8/23 (given that the odds are 1:4 for each BPC). Since your a statistician, why don't you calculate the liklihood of doing as bad or worse than you did over 60 runs. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:39:00 - [14] - Quote RubyPorto wrote: Liza Hawkeye wrote: RubyPorto wrote: By the way, how many total BPCs did you get from your 60 runs? And what's your actual calculated %chance? According to the formula: Reverse_Chance = Base_Chance * (1 + (0.01 * Reverse_Engineering_Skill_Level)) * (1 + (0.1 * (Datacore_1_Skill_Level + Datacore_2_Skill_Level))) And base chance of the intact relic (40%) and my skills it's 5-5-4 chance must be 79.8%, but my yield was 23 BPCs and only 8 of them are normal to produce. 23/60 is easily within the likely outcomes. Same with 8/23 (given that the odds are 1:4 for each BPC). Since your a statistician, why don't you calculate the liklihood of doing as bad or worse than you did over 60 runs. 8/23 are not the BPC for 1 exact subsystem but for 2 subsystems. So it's 3+5. and 15 BPC for other 2 subsystem that are unworthy of production. I'll monitor my future reverses, but I'm not sure that results will be better...
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2048	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:43:00 - [15] - Quote Liza Hawkeye wrote: RubyPorto wrote: Liza Hawkeye wrote: RubyPorto wrote: By the way, how many total BPCs did you get from your 60 runs? And what's your actual calculated %chance? According to the formula: Reverse_Chance = Base_Chance * (1 + (0.01 * Reverse_Engineering_Skill_Level)) * (1 + (0.1 * (Datacore_1_Skill_Level + Datacore_2_Skill_Level))) And base chance of the intact relic (40%) and my skills it's 5-5-4 chance must be 79.8%, but my yield was 23 BPCs and only 8 of them are normal to produce. 23/60 is easily within the likely outcomes. Same with 8/23 (given that the odds are 1:4 for each BPC). Since your a statistician, why don't you calculate the liklihood of doing as bad or worse than you did over 60 runs. 8/23 are not the BPC for 1 exact subsystem but for 2 subsystems. So it's 3+5. and 15 BPC for other 2 subsystem that are unworthy of production. I'll monitor my future reverses, but I'm not sure that results will be better... 8/23 is 34% That's a pretty likely outcome when flipping a coin 23 times. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Andy DelGardo Hedion University Amarr Empire 68	Posted - 2012.06.24 21:54:00 - [16] - Quote No clue what this is all about, i don't notice any difference in RE whatsoever. 3 out of 60 tries is pretty crappy, but thats the risk u have to take for playing a high stake game, since the actual combined chance to get a acc. bay is only 20%, sure 5% sucks, but thats still within the limits for such small amount of try's. bye Andy PS: Also complaining about loosing money in a risky chance based system is kinda silly :)
Mr Epeen It's All About Me 1505	Posted - 2012.06.24 23:55:00 - [17] - Quote It's funny how most everyone seems to be defending invention and reverse engineering mechanics even though they are chance based in a game that requires huge skillpoint sink to even be able to attempt them. Yet when I suggested that the same mechanic be used to make the odd piece of ammo misfire I was jumped all over for suggesting a chance based mechanic in a skill based game. Just sayin' Mr Epeen There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks
Roll Sizzle Beef Space Mutiny 556	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:14:00 - [18] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: Just sayin' Give me a decent way to inject skill play into R&D? There are just no tools to do so yet with this mechanic. Other than provide 100% chance of invention at the cost of exponentially higher material cost to incorporate the necessary item sink for average tries. Yet that would lose some of the fun and jeopardy, currently more is always better, but there is no set goal number to reach. Knowing succinct totals I think would just make it so much more grindy.
Skydell Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums 291	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:19:00 - [19] - Quote tldr version for you OP, nobody knows. They are just too stubborn to say it and would rather hash up long dreary babbles about RnG and chance. Devs won't say because chances are they don't know what they did either.
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2052	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:30:00 - [20] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: It's funny how most everyone seems to be defending invention and reverse engineering mechanics even though they are chance based in a game that requires huge skillpoint sink to even be able to attempt them. Yet when I suggested that the same mechanic be used to make the odd piece of ammo misfire I was jumped all over for suggesting a chance based mechanic in a skill based game. Just sayin' Mr Epeen I think people like to know how their ships will perform in combat. It could be an interesting idea, though. Linkey? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Mr Epeen It's All About Me 1505	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:34:00 - [21] - Quote If I spend a year getting well skilled to invent, grind 2 billion ISK for a freighter BPO, spend 6 months researching it, spend another month for one BP copy of it and toss in 20 or 30 mil for a good decrypter, I bloody well want to have a JF BP when it finishes in the lab. Having some RNG based system for rockets is one thing, but let's face it, it's a stupid system for high end invention/RE. Mr Epeen There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks
Mortimer Civeri Aliastra Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:34:00 - [22] - Quote The law if independent trials, bites you in the butt. Pray harder to the Random Number God. "I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2052	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:35:00 - [23] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: If I spend a year getting well skilled to invent, grind 2 billion ISK for a freighter BPO, spend 6 months researching it, spend another month for one BP copy of it and toss in 20 or 30 mil for a good decrypter, I bloody well want to have a JF BP when it finishes in the lab. Having some RNG based system for rockets is one thing, but let's face it, it's a stupid system for high end invention/RE. Mr Epeen Why are you researching a BPO that you're using to invent from? And the 2b isn't lost, you can always sell it. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Mr Epeen It's All About Me 1505	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:40:00 - [24] - Quote RubyPorto wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: If I spend a year getting well skilled to invent, grind 2 billion ISK for a freighter BPO, spend 6 months researching it, spend another month for one BP copy of it and toss in 20 or 30 mil for a good decrypter, I bloody well want to have a JF BP when it finishes in the lab. Having some RNG based system for rockets is one thing, but let's face it, it's a stupid system for high end invention/RE. Mr Epeen Why are you researching a BPO that you're using to invent from? And the 2b isn't lost, you can always sell it. Because I need to build a freighter from it to make the JF that may or may not result from over a year of effort to attempt it. Guess you don't build/ invent, do you? Mr Epeen There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks
RubyPorto SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT 2052	Posted - 2012.06.25 00:44:00 - [25] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: RubyPorto wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: If I spend a year getting well skilled to invent, grind 2 billion ISK for a freighter BPO, spend 6 months researching it, spend another month for one BP copy of it and toss in 20 or 30 mil for a good decrypter, I bloody well want to have a JF BP when it finishes in the lab. Having some RNG based system for rockets is one thing, but let's face it, it's a stupid system for high end invention/RE. Mr Epeen Why are you researching a BPO that you're using to invent from? And the 2b isn't lost, you can always sell it. Because I need to build a freighter from it to make the JF that may or may not result from over a year of effort to attempt it. Guess you don't build/ invent, do you? Mr Epeen You were asking for a BP, not a JF. If you're gonna say something about wanting to build it yourself, where's your tech moon? And, the second try only costs another copy and 20-30m for a decryptor. You're picking the least efficient way to invent JF BPCs and complaining that it's not efficient enough. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Zifrian Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing 354	Posted - 2012.06.25 01:32:00 - [26] - Quote Liza Hawkeye wrote: I'm trying to get what happened with reverse engineering in the last couple of weeks. For example I got only 3 Accelerated Ejection Bay BPCs from 60 reverse engineering works made with skills 5-5-4 from Intact Ancient Relics and it caused me to lose money on this according to total cost of each BPC. As for now - my chance on reverse engineering is is like 40% and it makes me cry, because I'm just loosing money. I'm wondering - will CCP 'repair' tech III reserch/production or it will be left unprofitable/low-profitable thing? Yours sincere, Liza Hawkeye Short answer: You need to do the math. Short solution: Download the program in my sig to have it do it for you. T3 is profitable if you do it right. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour!
Dinsdale Pirannha Pirannha Corp 228	Posted - 2012.06.25 02:10:00 - [27] - Quote To the OP: Check in the wormhole forum online. See if anyone else is suddenly having issues with T3 reverse engineering. But if you were 23/60, and you think you have a 73% expected success rate, I would say there is something definitely odd happening. Don't listen to the dullards. A sample size of 60 IS NOT considered trivial. And if you have results for 120, please post them. I would be very interested in seeing them.
Liza Hawkeye Discontent Innovations 0	Posted - 2012.06.25 06:18:00 - [28] - Quote Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: To the OP: Check in the wormhole forum online. See if anyone else is suddenly having issues with T3 reverse engineering. But if you were 23/60, and you think you have a 73% expected success rate, I would say there is something definitely odd happening. Don't listen to the dullards. A sample size of 60 IS NOT considered trivial. And if you have results for 120, please post them. I would be very interested in seeing them. I think today I'll finish new batch of 120 reverses and sure I'll share the result.
Khalia Nestune Mad Stacks 14	Posted - 2012.06.25 08:02:00 - [29] - Quote The problem here is that it's perfectly possible to have 100 straight fails. Not likely, but possible. You can't make any assumptions about changes to a system based on a random number generator from the results. I am reminded of this Dilbert strip: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2001-10-25/ http://www.mylootyourtears.com
Victoria Sin Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 32	Posted - 2012.06.25 08:06:00 - [30] - Quote RubyPorto wrote: Liza Hawkeye wrote: I understand your position, but I'm not bad in statistics (I'm and economist) and I totally see that considering the number of jobs I'm doing - the average chance of getting BPC became much lower. And the chance of getting a good BPC is awfully low now. Thats made me to post that thread to get an answer - did CCP change smth with reverse engineering chance or only I'm suffering from my bad luck or smth. If your a statistician, tell me, would you assume the coin is unfair if you see a run of 40 heads when you flip a coin 400 times? That would be unusual. It's (1/n)^x, where `n' is 2 (2 possible outcomes) and x is the number of coin tosses. For 10 in a row, you get 0.5^10 = 0.0009765625, which I believe is 1 in 1024 sets of 10 coin tosses.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.