| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Biggus McChinnus
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
   |
Posted - 2010.07.07 20:52:00 -
[1]
Introduction
The questions of the relationship between Agent Quality & LP Reward, and the relationship between System Security Level & LP Reward, are ones that I've heard a many answers for:
 Quote:
Also ... L4QL18 doesnt pay much worse than QL20. (iirc 6650 vs 6500 LP for WC)
Quote:
A difference of 0.1 in system security translates to a 10% increase in rewards. A 1 point difference in agent quality is roughly a 1% difference in rewards. Thus it would be more beneficial to use a lower sec, lower quality agent, than a higher sec, higher quality agent unless the difference is extremely staggering.
Quote:
Lowsec agents will give you lot more LP. I think its about a 75% increase going from 0.5 to 0.1
Quote:
-0.1 system sec status = +10 quality, AFAIK.
... and there are many, many other examples, explanations, theories, etc.
I wasn't happy with this, so I set out to find the answer for myself. Having logged the LP rewards for over 120 missions from a handful of different agents, based in several systems, I managed to empirically arrive at an equation which could calculate the relative quality of an agent, from an LP point of view.
Observations
Before I show the equation I came to, I'll explain a few observations I made while looking at the figures I'd collected:
1. Effective Quality does not affect LP Reward.
To be honest, this one was always pretty obvious; you just have to read the description of the 'Negotiation' skillbook to realise that Effective Quality can't possibly influence LP reward.
Quote:
Skill at agent negotiation. Improves agent effective quality. 5% additional pay per skill level for agent missions.
The skill boosts your ISK reward by boosting the Effective Quality of the agent. If it boosted the LP reward too, it would say so in the skillbook description, but it doesn't and, therefore, Effective Quality cannot possibly influence LP rewards.
To expand on this, since Effective Quality is influenced by your standings with that agent, standings cannot possibly influence LP rewards.
2. LP Reward is influenced by the system your agent is in, not the system the mission is in.
This point is pretty well documented and it is something that became apparent after running a couple of missions with the agents.
3. The relationship between Agent Quality and LP Reward is quadratic.
To quote some figures, if a Q-20 agent gave you 100 LP for a particular mission, a Q0 agent would give you 200 LP and a Q20 agent would give you 400 LP, assuming the system security for all three agents were the same.
4. The relationship between System Security Level and LP Reward is linear.
Again, to quote some figures, if agent in a 1.00 system gave 100 LP, an agent in a 0.85 system would give you 120 LP, 0.70 would give 140 LP, 0.55 would give 160 LP, etc. |
Biggus McChinnus
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 20:58:00 -
[2]
Equation
Ultimately, I came up with the following equation, which calculates the quality (LQ) of an agent from a LP Reward point of view:
LQ = ((0.00625 * AQ^2) + (0.0375 * AQ) + 1) * ((SC * SL) + 1)
AQ = Agent Quality
SL = Sec Level for agent's system (see here: eve.grismar.net/ssec/index.php)
SC = Unknown Constant
I, empirically, calculated the Unknown Constant (SC) as -0.5722. This seemed to predict LP Rewards accurate to within ¦5% of their actual value when I recalculated the rewards for the missions I had already run with the above formula.
Limitations
Note that, of the 120 missions I ran, I only ran 7 in 0.0 and all 7 were from the same system in Syndicate, where the true sec level was only -0.10. Although the equation proved to be valid for the missions run in this system, I do not know whether it will hold true for all agents in 0.0.
How does this help? What can I do with this?
With the above equation, you can accurately and objectively compare the relative LP Rewards an agent will give.
You create a table to gauge a rough idea of how different quality agents in different security systems looks:
| 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.80 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.00
------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------
Q 20 | 4.00 | 4.54 | 5.07 | 5.61 | 6.14 | 6.68 | 7.21 | 7.75 | 8.28 | 8.82 | 9.35
Q 15 | 3.41 | 3.86 | 4.32 | 4.77 | 5.23 | 5.68 | 6.14 | 6.60 | 7.04 | 7.51 | 7.96
Q 10 | 2.88 | 3.26 | 4.64 | 4.03 | 4.41 | 4.80 | 5.18 | 5.57 | 5.95 | 6.34 | 6.67
Q 5 | 2.41 | 2.73 | 3.05 | 3.37 | 3.69 | 4.02 | 4.34 | 4.66 | 3.98 | 5.30 | 5.62
Q 0 | 2.00 | 2.27 | 2.54 | 2.80 | 3.07 | 3.34 | 3.61 | 3.87 | 4.14 | 4.41 | 4.68
Q -5 | 1.66 | 1.88 | 1.74 | 2.32 | 2.54 | 2.76 | 2.99 | 3.21 | 3.43 | 3.65 | 3.87
Q-10 | 1.38 | 1.56 | 1.74 | 1.93 | 2.11 | 2.29 | 2.48 | 2.66 | 2.85 | 3.03 | 3.21
Q-15 | 1.16 | 1.31 | 1.47 | 1.62 | 1.77 | 1.93 | 2.08 | 2.24 | 2.39 | 2.55 | 2.70
Q-20 | 1.00 | 1.13 | 1.27 | 1.40 | 1.54 | 1.67 | 1.80 | 1.94 | 2.07 | 2.20 | 2.34
|
Biggus McChinnus
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 21:04:00 -
[3]
Or you could create a list of the agents you're looking at using and sort them by LP Reward to help you pick the best agent for hoarding LP:
Agent Name | Corporation | L | Q | Division | System | Sec Level | LP Modifier
---------------------|----------------------------|---|-----|-------------------|------------|------------------|-------------
Makkaraisen Uemon | Lai Dai Protection Service | 4 | 18 | Security | Hykanima | 0.246859379 (L) | 7.5376
Shishanen Ishinoki | Caldari Business Tribunal | 4 | 18 | Intelligence | Aedald | 0.250457749 (L) | 7.5195
Kauntora Itkaku | Ishukone Watch | 4 | 19 | Command | Tamo | 0.338287344 (L) | 7.3070
Uittaras Jakawaki | Caldari Navy | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Otsasai | 0.349161332 (L) | 6.8017
Okage Sukarala | Lai Dai Protection Service | 4 | 17 | Security | Anin | 0.358628244 (L) | 6.7556
Asturi Arakenda | Corporate Police Force | 4 | 18 | Surveillance | Oshaima | 0.453128378 (H) | 6.5016
Eratsaka Ogyonin | Corporate Police Force | 4 | 18 | Surveillance | Irjunen | 0.520267253 (H) | 6.1644
Konuoma Ichodan | Sukuuvestaa Corporation | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Arvasaras | 0.516733846 (H) | 5.9867
Uesi Tuomaitoh | Hyasyoda Corporation | 4 | 18 | Internal Security | Wuos | 0.561773868 (H) | 5.9559
Sotrentaira Isara | Lai Dai Protection Service | 4 | 16 | Command | Uuhulanen | 0.492079488 (H) | 5.9113
Kia Isatoh | Caldari Navy | 4 | 18 | Command | Ichoriya | 0.571031816 (H) | 5.9095
Aakonoshin Piertalen | Sukuuvestaa Corporation | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Sivala | 0.550531907 (H) | 5.8223
Shuhola Aularoila | Ishukone Corporation | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Hentogaira | 0.566958280 (H) | 5.7424
Hotisku Sogas | Spacelane Patrol | 4 | 13 | Security | Pakkonen | 0.420910297 (L) | 5.6542
Mitinen Tenanochi | Caldari Navy | 4 | 6 | Surveillance | Ienakkamon | 0.107988091 (L) | 5.4718
Oduma Onnajus | Spacelane Patrol | 4 | 18 | Command | Sankkasen | 0.668238369 (H) | 5.4212
Ailen Saakuka | Hyasyoda Corporation | 4 | 18 | Internal Security | Gekutami | 0.699187208 (H) | 5.2658
Nosken Murvas | Caldari Navy | 4 | 6 | Security | Notoras | 0.188790633 (L) | 5.2021
Chalenet Plarrovon | The Scope | 4 | 13 | Intelligence | Heorah | 0.537723493 (H) | 5.1563
Kakukainen Kittavas | Spacelane Patrol | 4 | 18 | Command | Isinokka | 0.725113184 (H) | 5.1356
Note that I multiplied the equation by 4.6751 to get the 'LP Modifier' values in the two tables above, as this sets a Q-20 agent in a 1.00 sec system to 1.00. The second table was created using data from the official datadump.
Notes
This equation applies to agents of all Levels. The difference between, say, a Level 3 agent and a Level 4 agent is the mission pool the agent selects missions from. Each mission can be assumed to have a 'Base LP Reward' and an L4 mission would, in the majority of cases, have a higher 'Base LP Reward' than an L3 mission. You therefore need to compare the 'LP Modifier' value for one agent with those of other agents of the same Level.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask in this thread and I'll try to answer.
If you're going to use it on your site, in a tutorial or guide, on a wiki, etc., please link back to this thread. This isn't an ego thing. It will mean that people will direct questions regarding the equation and method and such at me, not the host, author, etc.
-B
|
Biggus McChinnus
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 21:10:00 -
[4]
Reserved
|
Lusty Wench
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 22:12:00 -
[5]
And how does blitzing effect the payouts?
Some of those Caldari agents are nearly worthless as they get farmed/blitzed all day.
|
Biggus McChinnus
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 22:17:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Lusty Wench
And how does blitzing effect the payouts?
Some of those Caldari agents are nearly worthless as they get farmed/blitzed all day.
Blitzing shouldn't affect the LP Reward, at least I didn't observe any drop, even when I ran missions in busy hubs ...
|
Irdia Freelancer
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 23:26:00 -
[7]
Looks like some substantial work done there. Nicely done.
Blitzing missions does effect lp in the long run, as does mission farming.
A mission starts with an expected completion amount of time varying from about 6 hours down to 10 minutes. When a mission is blitzed it will over time reduce the completion times. When a mission is farmed it will over time increase completion times.
One mission blitz won't do much. You probably wont even notice the change given the effect of one mission blitz vs all the players getting the same mission every day. Same about one mission farmed. But generally over time the mission farming increases completion times, blitzing decreases it. Eg recon 1/3 takes 1-3 minutes to complete yet with so many mission farmers about for so long, its actual completion time for a bonus is bit over 5 hours. Seams to be more mission farmers about than mission blitzers just by looking at which has sway on the completion times of missions like recon 1/3.
The same applies to all mission completion times. Material for war prep started out with much longer completion times, but with players dropping ore in dock, then accepting the mission and completing, completion times have dropped back to like 12 min. Cosmos mission have similarly reduced for most missions. ie those who originally did them got much more factional standings for doing them.
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 23:48:00 -
[8]
Nice work - I'll review it in more detail later. I'll also see if I can provide some data points from different 0.0 regions.
-Liang
--
Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire |
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:55:00 -
[9]
Very substantial work I must say. Kudos for getting it sorted.
May I suggest creating an article for this on the official CCP Eve wiki for posterity.
(I personally don't like how information is organized/maintained in there, but it's probably a better focal point that digging through forum links months from now) |
Conrad Lionhart
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 08:22:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Sturmwolke
Very substantial work I must say. Kudos for getting it sorted.
May I suggest creating an article for this on the official CCP Eve wiki for posterity.
(I personally don't like how information is organized/maintained in there, but it's probably a better focal point that digging through forum links months from now)
I agree this is good research. Yes you may want to put up your findings at the wiki page, once you are happy with them.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Mission
I have a question though. There are skills that increase the LP gained from missions, such as Bureaucratic Connections and Labor Connections. Are they all the same for you? Because if they aren't, they may mess up your findings.
My Blog: http://www.brugamers.com/index.php?blog=43 |
|
|
floater666
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 10:15:00 -
[11]
Edited by: floater666 on 08/07/2010 10:16:21
It is disgusting to see that low sec is barely giving you more LP. How CCP can be so stupid to expect people loosing billion worth mission ships just to get extra 1 million worth of LP per mission? Going to low sec has negative profit!
Do they have a mathematician at all? I am back to the game after a year off to see that they are still searching for their brain.
Risk vs Reward wise low sec should have the biggest payouts by far. 0.0 is sometimes more secure than empire, many systems have zero people in them, not to mention if you are blue and the gates are camped by your allies.
|
Axemaster
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 10:59:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Axemaster on 08/07/2010 10:59:54
Originally by: Biggus McChinnus
3. The relationship between Agent Quality and LP Reward is quadratic.
To quote some figures, if a Q-20 agent gave you 100 LP for a particular mission, a Q0 agent would give you 200 LP and a Q20 agent would give you 400 LP, assuming the system security for all three agents were the same.
I think you meant to say something else? Because this makes no sense...
EDIT: Plus didn't you just say agent quality doesn't affect the LP reward?
|
Caterpillar Sunshine
|
Posted - 2010.07.09 09:13:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Axemaster
Edited by: Axemaster on 08/07/2010 10:59:54
Originally by: Biggus McChinnus
3. The relationship between Agent Quality and LP Reward is quadratic.
To quote some figures, if a Q-20 agent gave you 100 LP for a particular mission, a Q0 agent would give you 200 LP and a Q20 agent would give you 400 LP, assuming the system security for all three agents were the same.
I think you meant to say something else? Because this makes no sense...
EDIT: Plus didn't you just say agent quality doesn't affect the LP reward?
Agent Effective Quality doesn't affect LP. Agent Quality does. The EVE Wiki describes the difference between the two better than I could:
Quote:
Quality: Agents also have a base quality, measured on a scale of -20 to +20, and an effective quality, rated between -30 and +55. An agent's base quality, coupled with their level, is used to determine whether you have access to the agent's missions, while their effective quality is involved in calculating mission rewards. Effective quality is derived from an agent's base quality plus a combination of your skills and standing with that agent. The higher the effective quality is, the better the mission rewards.
And which part of that point didn't make sense to you?
P.S. Biggus' subscription has run out and I won't be re-subbing for a few days, so I'll post with this alt until then.
|
Caterpillar Sunshine
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.07.09 09:18:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Conrad Lionhart
I have a question though. There are skills that increase the LP gained from missions, such as Bureaucratic Connections and Labor Connections. Are they all the same for you? Because if they aren't, they may mess up your findings.
When I calculated the rewards, I compensated for the Connections skill. Taking the equation from the wiki:
Quote:
Actual LP Reward = Base LP Reward x (1 + (0.05 x (Level of Connection Skill 1 + Level of Connection Skill 2)))
I simply rearranged the equation to make the 'Base LP Reward' the subject:
Quote:
Base LP Reward = Actual LP Reward / (1 + (0.05 x (Level of Connections Skill 1 + Level of Connections Skill 2)))
Then I based the rest of my analysis off these unmodified values.
|
Bugone
|
Posted - 2010.07.09 13:34:00 -
[15]
Well done working this out.
Would be interesting to workout if the relationship (if any) between LP reward and standing gain.
|
Ten Bulls
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.07.10 00:54:00 -
[16]
| 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.80 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.00
------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------
Q 20 | 4.00 | 4.54 | 5.07 | 5.61 | 6.14 | 6.68 | 7.21 | 7.75 | 8.28 | 8.82 | 9.35
Q 15 | 3.41 | 3.86 | 4.32 | 4.77 | 5.23 | 5.68 | 6.14 | 6.60 | 7.04 | 7.51 | 7.96
Q 10 | 2.88 | 3.26 | 4.64 | 4.03 | 4.41 | 4.80 | 5.18 | 5.57 | 5.95 | 6.34 | 6.67
Q 5 | 2.41 | 2.73 | 3.05 | 3.37 | 3.69 | 4.02 | 4.34 | 4.66 | 3.98 | 5.30 | 5.62
I believe one (or both) the bolded numbers must be wrong.
|
Caterpillar Sunshine
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.07.10 10:48:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Ten Bulls
| 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.80 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.00
------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------
Q 20 | 4.00 | 4.54 | 5.07 | 5.61 | 6.14 | 6.68 | 7.21 | 7.75 | 8.28 | 8.82 | 9.35
Q 15 | 3.41 | 3.86 | 4.32 | 4.77 | 5.23 | 5.68 | 6.14 | 6.60 | 7.04 | 7.51 | 7.96
Q 10 | 2.88 | 3.26 | 4.64 | 4.03 | 4.41 | 4.80 | 5.18 | 5.57 | 5.95 | 6.34 | 6.67
Q 5 | 2.41 | 2.73 | 3.05 | 3.37 | 3.69 | 4.02 | 4.34 | 4.66 | 3.98 | 5.30 | 5.62
I believe one (or both) the bolded numbers must be wrong.
Oops ... nice catch! Should be 4.32 and 3.64.
|
Blatantly Obvious
|
Posted - 2010.07.10 14:49:00 -
[18]
Firstly, mad respect. I appreciate people that do this for the community and logging results is the correct way to go about it, thanks!
However, this following quote is ... heavily dependent on CCP maintaining their tooltips, which we know they don't, so just keep that in mind.
Originally by: Biggus McChinnus
1. Effective Quality does not affect LP Reward.
To be honest, this one was always pretty obvious; you just have to read the description of the 'Negotiation' skillbook to realise that Effective Quality can't possibly influence LP reward.
|
Mr Nutt
|
Posted - 2010.07.18 23:15:00 -
[19]
Are you sure the formula is right? According to what you have written down, the LP multiplier first goes down and then up as a function of agent quality for a fixed system security level (since AQ is squared in the formula). Surely the multiplier should be monotonically increasing as function of AQ for given SS? Or am I misreading it completely? (it is quite late here...)
|
Yakti
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.07.19 13:09:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Biggus McChinnus
Or you could create a list of the agents you're looking at using and sort them by LP Reward to help you pick the best agent for hoarding LP:
Agent Name | Corporation | L | Q | Division | System | Sec Level | LP Modifier
---------------------|----------------------------|---|-----|-------------------|------------|------------------|-------------
Makkaraisen Uemon | Lai Dai Protection Service | 4 | 18 | Security | Hykanima | 0.246859379 (L) | 7.5376
Shishanen Ishinoki | Caldari Business Tribunal | 4 | 18 | Intelligence | Aedald | 0.250457749 (L) | 7.5195
Kauntora Itkaku | Ishukone Watch | 4 | 19 | Command | Tamo | 0.338287344 (L) | 7.3070
Uittaras Jakawaki | Caldari Navy | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Otsasai | 0.349161332 (L) | 6.8017
Okage Sukarala | Lai Dai Protection Service | 4 | 17 | Security | Anin | 0.358628244 (L) | 6.7556
Asturi Arakenda | Corporate Police Force | 4 | 18 | Surveillance | Oshaima | 0.453128378 (H) | 6.5016
Eratsaka Ogyonin | Corporate Police Force | 4 | 18 | Surveillance | Irjunen | 0.520267253 (H) | 6.1644
Konuoma Ichodan | Sukuuvestaa Corporation | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Arvasaras | 0.516733846 (H) | 5.9867
Uesi Tuomaitoh | Hyasyoda Corporation | 4 | 18 | Internal Security | Wuos | 0.561773868 (H) | 5.9559
Sotrentaira Isara | Lai Dai Protection Service | 4 | 16 | Command | Uuhulanen | 0.492079488 (H) | 5.9113
Kia Isatoh | Caldari Navy | 4 | 18 | Command | Ichoriya | 0.571031816 (H) | 5.9095
Aakonoshin Piertalen | Sukuuvestaa Corporation | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Sivala | 0.550531907 (H) | 5.8223
Shuhola Aularoila | Ishukone Corporation | 4 | 17 | Internal Security | Hentogaira | 0.566958280 (H) | 5.7424
Hotisku Sogas | Spacelane Patrol | 4 | 13 | Security | Pakkonen | 0.420910297 (L) | 5.6542
Mitinen Tenanochi | Caldari Navy | 4 | 6 | Surveillance | Ienakkamon | 0.107988091 (L) | 5.4718
Oduma Onnajus | Spacelane Patrol | 4 | 18 | Command | Sankkasen | 0.668238369 (H) | 5.4212
Ailen Saakuka | Hyasyoda Corporation | 4 | 18 | Internal Security | Gekutami | 0.699187208 (H) | 5.2658
Nosken Murvas | Caldari Navy | 4 | 6 | Security | Notoras | 0.188790633 (L) | 5.2021
Chalenet Plarrovon | The Scope | 4 | 13 | Intelligence | Heorah | 0.537723493 (H) | 5.1563
Kakukainen Kittavas | Spacelane Patrol | 4 | 18 | Command | Isinokka | 0.725113184 (H) | 5.1356
Can you make this for Gallente agents aswell?
|
|
|
Coth Sindari
|
Posted - 2010.07.30 21:10:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Mr Nutt
Are you sure the formula is right? According to what you have written down, the LP multiplier first goes down and then up as a function of agent quality for a fixed system security level (since AQ is squared in the formula). Surely the multiplier should be monotonically increasing as function of AQ for given SS? Or am I misreading it completely? (it is quite late here...)
do have the same problem, cannot come to conclusive results here, any ideas?
|
Irdia Freelancer
|
Posted - 2010.07.31 02:43:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Bugone
Would be interesting to workout if the relationship (if any) between LP reward and standing gain.
Is no change in standing gain due to the quality of an agent. All agents of the same level give the same standing gain. I've used this to raise standings quickly myself. you can raise from no standings to lvl 4 missions in around 3 hours quite easily. -20 ql agent gives the same standings gain as a +20 agent, plus has much lower standing reqs to use the lower ql agent. Lower ql agents, faster to grind standings with as can change up agents earlier.
Train socail skill adds 5%/lvl to positive standing gains for a max +25% at lvl 5. Doesn't matter what other socail skills trained, the standing gain remains unchanged. Standing gain determined by time for mission bonus (longer = more standing), the mission level, and your social skill (lvl 5 for +25%). Agent lvl nor sec status of system play no part in standings while they do affect lp.
|
Biggus McChinnus
Minmatar
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2010.08.05 09:16:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Biggus McChinnus on 05/08/2010 09:20:25
Originally by: Mr Nutt
Are you sure the formula is right? According to what you have written down, the LP multiplier first goes down and then up as a function of agent quality for a fixed system security level (since AQ is squared in the formula). Surely the multiplier should be monotonically increasing as function of AQ for given SS? Or am I misreading it completely? (it is quite late here...)
Looking at the section of the formula you refer to:
((0.00625 * AQ^2) + (0.0375 * AQ) + 1)
Agent quality ranges from -20 to +20, so, even though the AQ^2 term decreases and then increases within this range, the AQ term is large enough to ensure the result is always increasing. It is not until you reach a quality of below -30 that you begin to see the multiplier decrease and then increase, but, as we know, -30 quality agents, thankfully, do not exist.
Originally by: Yakti
Can you make this for Gallente agents aswell?
Here is a .csv, containing the LP Modifier values for all the 'Basic Agents' in the game, i.e. Storyline, COSMOS, Faction Warfare, R&D and any other special classes of agents are removed. You should be able to import it into Excel and search through for Gallente Agents. It's currently sorted by Level (from 5 to 1) and then by LP Modifier.
Be warned, though! It contains nearly 9000 lines, so it could take some time to load. Using Excel's AutoFilter function should help you search through them quickly. I'm sorry that the .csv doesn't have a 'Faction' column; I've misplaced the version of the document that had it!
|
Idea Tester
|
Posted - 2010.08.05 18:02:00 -
[24]
Thank you for this excellent work.
|
Joogoh Shipuh
|
Posted - 2010.09.17 21:18:00 -
[25]
Hope you're still around, Biggus, because I have a few questions for you. ;) I was poking through the CSV file you linked in your last post, and saw some irregularities. Because the CSV file only contains absolute data and not the formula used, I tried to duplicate your figures but to no avail. (Issues below sectioned off for ease of readability.)
1. Right off the bat, if you check your tables in this thread, they match just fine with each other, but comparing them to the data in the CSV, the LP Modifiers listed for the top Caldari agents above do not match the corresponding LP Modifier in the CSV. Am I missing something here?
2. The LP Modifier data in the CSV itself looks a bit odd. Take the agents Agirtad (RF), Kia (CN) and Asturi (CPF), for example. They're all L4 Q18 agents, and while Kia's LP Modifier is appropriately smaller than Agirtad's due to Kia's slightly higher True Sec Level, Asturi's LP Modifier is the lowest of the three despite having the lowest True Sec Level.
3. When I used your "LQ = ((0.00625 * AQ^2) + (0.0375 * AQ) + 1) * ((SC * SL) + 1)" formula in my spreadsheet to attempt to recreate the LP Modifiers from the CSV data, I ran into two problems: 1) the resulting value was far different from the LP Modifier values in either the CSV or the tables above, and no additional multiplier used would produce either set of results; and 2) despite what you said above about the AQ term being sufficiently large to keep the parabolic AQ^2 term in check, it wasn't the case in my spreadsheet when I ran the formula.
4. I tried multiplying the equation by the same 4.6751 you used, and got the correct ~2.0 value you have for Q0 and 1.0 sec, but every other combination of AQ and SL I tried resulted in far different results. For instance, with AQ = 20 and SL = 1.0:
LQ = ((0.00625 * AQ^2) + (0.0375 * AQ) + 1) * ((SC * SL) + 1)
LQ = ((0.00625 * 20^2) + (0.0375 * 20) + 1) * ((-0.5722 * 1.0) + 1)
LQ = ((2.5) + (0.75) + 1) * ((-.5722) + 1)
LQ = 4.25 * .4278
LQ = 1.81815
Your table specifies a LP Modifier of 4.0 for Q20 and 1.0, and a multiplier of 4.6751 doesn't fix it either.
---
So what am I doing wrong above? Hopefully the example I gave will point out either an incorrect calculation/assumption on my part or a typo on yours. Your work on the topic seems monumental if correct considering all the bad information we have been fed (and your tables on this page at least look correct), but I'd love to be able to apply it to the other L4 agents as well.
Thanks in advance for your time!
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.09.18 02:46:00 -
[26]
Agent = Q20 in 0.0
-- Socials at 4 (I think):
Right Hand Of Zazzmatazz: 4696 LP
Attack Of The Drones: 7563 LP
Worlds Collide: 12482 LP
Vengeance [Mordus] - 11937 LP
Blockade, DED: 12482 LP
--- Socials at 5 (I know):
The Assault, Caldari Navy, 8930 LP
Pirate Business [Amarr]: 11703
Silence The Informant: 12482
Gone Berserk: 8260 LP
Unauthorized Mil Presence, Caldari Navy: 8114 LP
Intercept the Saboteurs [Amarr]: 8697 LP
Cargo Delivery [Serpentis]: 6371 LP
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
Blog
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.09.20 05:33:00 -
[27]
So I'm pretty sure that the formula is wrong since it doesn't behave at all like is mentioned in the OP. It also doesn't match any of the charts posted. I don't presently have enough data points to construct anything meaningful.
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
Blog
|
Joogoh Shipuh
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 08:21:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
So I'm pretty sure that the formula is wrong since it doesn't behave at all like is mentioned in the OP. It also doesn't match any of the charts posted. I don't presently have enough data points to construct anything meaningful.
-Liang
I'm glad I'm not the only one having this issue. Was quite disappointed considering all the posts above that didn't seem to have any problems with the above information. Hopefully OP will be around soon to clear things up. =) |
Besbin
|
Posted - 2010.12.07 13:09:00 -
[29]
I'm pretty sure Biggus has simply made an error in the LP modifier formula in the CSV file. The maths look valid. I've made an Excel sheet with his data and the actual formula. Also I've included various other LP rewards relevant information such at Faction, Standing Required, Kill Mission Percentage and Actual LP Gain with Connections skills adjustment included. Now it can't get much easier, can it? :-)
Enjoy: LP_spreadsheet
And to join the aweinspired choir: You ROCK Biggus! Thank you for finally making this long sought after piece of information available to our hungering masses!
Much love
Besbin
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |