Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

At this point, I'm more concerned with the chance of success; ME/PE and number of runs are another ball of wax entirely that may involve another computation involving skills and the T1 BPC quality and runs...

That said, I'm using an ME20/PE0 50-run Proto Cloak BPC for each attempt and getting ME -7, PE -4 (I think) and 9 runs consistently. So the quality is definitely an input-x,y,z; get-a,b,c function.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

Encryption methods: +3-5% chance per level
Supporting field skills: +2% chance per level

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

The decryptors appear to multiply your percentage chance of success--the best one gives a 1.3 multiplier, while the 'worst' one more than halves it with a 0.4 multiplier--but if it succeeds you get a huge amount of runs on the BPC.

---

Originally by: Ruffio Sepico

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

The decryptors appear to multiply your percentage chance of success--the best one gives a 1.3 multiplier, while the 'worst' one more than halves it with a 0.4 multiplier--but if it succeeds you get a huge amount of runs on the BPC.

---

What is a HUGE? amount of runs? I did some jobs last night and I still get the same amount of runs as I did pre-patch. 19 runs of a module using a 300 run t1 bpc, and the circurity schematics decryptor that is supposed to give the most runs. 1 job succeed, 4 failed, and all skills at level 4 + using best metha items.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

In any case, at least 5 more runs than the "best chance" decryptors, which in turn add 4 runs to the output.

---

Originally by: Dyeadmheet

---

One interesting thing I did notice on the test server is that with some 1 run BPCs that I used with a +4 run decryptor, the resulting BPC ended up with 4 runs. This seems to imply that with a really low-run input BPC you can end up with a base runs of 0, which then must get rounded up to 1 if there's no decrypter to add to the 0.

I saw some CCC II BPCs on contract in Jita on the real server that also seemed to show the same sort of behavior.

---

Originally by: Little Girly

---

Used max run covetor bpcs, stolen formulas, covetor ship, skills all level 5 - i only get 25% success rate making hulks.

---

Originally by: Umbriele

---

My last invention experience, after 1.4 patch:

10x invention jobs of cap rec II
all skills lvl4
formation layout decryptor
eutetic cap rec I
BPC ME140 PE10 300 runs

results: 8 successfull, 2 failed, 1 was 19 runs, 1 was 11 runs, the others all 10 runs.

---

Quote:

---

Instead of using the Invention skill, you have to use skills related to the datacores and interface needed for your invention process.


So, if you wanted to invent a Vagabond BPC using a Stabber BPC, you see that required datacores are:
ôDatacore - Minmatar Starship Engineeringö
ôDatacore û Mechanical Engineeringö
And the following Interface:
ôCryptic Ship Data Interfaceö

To get the best chance of a positive result you would have to have the following skills at level 5:

ôMinmatar Starship Engineeringö
ôMechanical Engineeringö
ôMinmatar Encryption Methodsö

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

Edited by: Vladimir Tinakin on 24/03/2007 04:21:41
While it is possible that the skills have unique modifiers, given the range of modules and ships for invention it is more likely that there is a "primary" and a "secondary" skill for each invention job and the modifier is based on that. This is, of course, assuming that the skills aren't equally "weighted" or that they aren't taken on the same level of the encryptions skill (as in my original post).


As for my second round of 6 "naked" hulk invention attempts at 4/3/3....

0 for 6.
This makes 0 for 11. Ouch.

Another 6 naked invention types put in for testing...

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

BTW, for those interested, I'm using a ME/PE 0 BPC to run these, and the successes were me/pe -4 each. So adjust that with whatever decryptor you want to use.

---

Originally by: sahtila

---

Why you dont use at least some cheap decryptor? There could be big negative effect for not using any decryptor. Same with base item.

---

Originally by: Dominique Vasilkovsky

---

Originally by: Umbriele

---

My last invention experience, after 1.4 patch:

10x invention jobs of cap rec II
all skills lvl4
formation layout decryptor
eutetic cap rec I
BPC ME140 PE10 300 runs

results: 8 successfull, 2 failed, 1 was 19 runs, 1 was 11 runs, the others all 10 runs.

---

If you used the same decryptor for all 10 jobs the number of runs look really odd to me. I would say you used a Circular Logic for the 19 run, a Classic Doctrine for the 11 run and Formation Layouts on the rest. If not then this is the very first sign of random number of runs. Can you please provide the ME / PE for the 11 and 19 run BPCs?

---

Originally by: Pizi

---

some lucky guy linked an 8 run hulk BPC in the BP channel
and he said he did it with an 1 run + stolen formula

dunno how this is possible, maybe their is a random factor

---

Originally by: Qual

---

Edited by: Qual on 26/03/2007 12:55:57
Ok, just a but of info for the wolfs...

I've found out the following:

There are "base stats" for inveted bpc's. THey are ME -4, PE -4. The decryptor used will modify these base stats. The numbers on the bpc going in to the job doesnt do anything. So no need to go for high, ME/PE prints.

(More here)

Runs have a base to. 1 for ships/rigs and 10 for modules. This number IS modified. You get a base number of runs equal to this formula:

runs = round.down((bpc runs/max runs of bpc type)*base runs) + datacore bonus

So for ships and tuners only max runs gives you a base of 1. Anything lower will be rounded to 0. Fortunately decryptors will add the runs to 0 and give a print anyways, but invention with no decryptors on anything lower than max run will fail by default. (That should explain the failure of the Covetor tests earlier in this thread...)

For modules the gains for max runs are larger, obviously. But in short, if you want many runs, put in max run bpc's.

EDIT: Fixed formula

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

However, I've gotten 4 successes on 1-run covetor bpcs (max run is 10), resulting in 1-run hulk bpcs. So the job success is not related to the number of runs--if it succeeds, you get 1 run guaranteed. As for the impact of a max run, you may be correct in that it has no appreciable impact...I have a slave...er, alt...whipping up some max runs while I do different testing on SiSi. One would hope that a max run ship BPC nets you at least one additional run, but if you're right then we'll all be better off using single runs for ship invention.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

When you say 2nd best, you mean Test Reports?

And yes, so far all my testing has not used any decryptors except for my initial "it works!" hulk invention testing.

I just finished the "naked" testing with no decryptors and no covetor...I'm now testing with a covetor but still no decryptor to get a feel for how much the cov helps.

And since it seems to escape a few people, yes this is all on singularity, the test server, where everything is 100 isk.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

Originally by: Qual

---

Edited by: Qual on 26/03/2007 12:55:57
Ok, just a but of info for the wolfs...

I've found out the following:

There are "base stats" for inveted bpc's. THey are ME -4, PE -4. The decryptor used will modify these base stats. The numbers on the bpc going in to the job doesnt do anything. So no need to go for high, ME/PE prints.

(More here)

Runs have a base to. 1 for ships/rigs and 10 for modules. This number IS modified. You get a base number of runs equal to this formula:

runs = round.down((bpc runs/max runs of bpc type)*base runs) + datacore bonus

So for ships and tuners only max runs gives you a base of 1. Anything lower will be rounded to 0. Fortunately decryptors will add the runs to 0 and give a print anyways, but invention with no decryptors on anything lower than max run will fail by default. (That should explain the failure of the Covetor tests earlier in this thread...)

For modules the gains for max runs are larger, obviously. But in short, if you want many runs, put in max run bpc's.

EDIT: Fixed formula

---

I agree with the "base stats" for ME/PE--they jive with my findings on invention with the me/pe 0 covetor BPCs.

However, I've gotten 4 successes on 1-run covetor bpcs (max run is 10), resulting in 1-run hulk bpcs. So the job success is not related to the number of runs--if it succeeds, you get 1 run guaranteed. As for the impact of a max run, you may be correct in that it has no appreciable impact...I have a slave...er, alt...whipping up some max runs while I do different testing on SiSi. One would hope that a max run ship BPC nets you at least one additional run, but if you're right then we'll all be better off using single runs for ship invention.

---

Originally by: N'kano Hunyeq

---

Edited by: N''kano Hunyeq on 26/03/2007 19:55:10

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

Originally by: Qual

---

Edited by: Qual on 26/03/2007 12:55:57
Ok, just a but of info for the wolfs...

I've found out the following:

There are "base stats" for inveted bpc's. THey are ME -4, PE -4. The decryptor used will modify these base stats. The numbers on the bpc going in to the job doesnt do anything. So no need to go for high, ME/PE prints.

(More here)

Runs have a base to. 1 for ships/rigs and 10 for modules. This number IS modified. You get a base number of runs equal to this formula:

runs = round.down((bpc runs/max runs of bpc type)*base runs) + datacore bonus

So for ships and tuners only max runs gives you a base of 1. Anything lower will be rounded to 0. Fortunately decryptors will add the runs to 0 and give a print anyways, but invention with no decryptors on anything lower than max run will fail by default. (That should explain the failure of the Covetor tests earlier in this thread...)

For modules the gains for max runs are larger, obviously. But in short, if you want many runs, put in max run bpc's.

EDIT: Fixed formula

---

I agree with the "base stats" for ME/PE--they jive with my findings on invention with the me/pe 0 covetor BPCs.

However, I've gotten 4 successes on 1-run covetor bpcs (max run is 10), resulting in 1-run hulk bpcs. So the job success is not related to the number of runs--if it succeeds, you get 1 run guaranteed. As for the impact of a max run, you may be correct in that it has no appreciable impact...I have a slave...er, alt...whipping up some max runs while I do different testing on SiSi. One would hope that a max run ship BPC nets you at least one additional run, but if you're right then we'll all be better off using single runs for ship invention.

---

I've tested using 10 runs and 5 runs, i will tell you i get more runs of the hulk bpc when using max runs and i will only be using max runs from now on. That extra run or so you get from using a 10 run is a lot of extra isk when you are talking about Hulks.

---

Originally by: ShadowRat

---

Edited by: ShadowRat on 27/03/2007 08:37:30
Lets start with multi formula:

succes rate= 1* (1+item in use) * (1+ enc.lev*0.02) * (1+ related science I.lev*0.02)* (1+ related science II.lev*0.02)* decryptor_mod

Multiply is resonable, but you can use 'add' too and results is not much diferent (form 67% to 85% at best config)

bpc:round_down(base_runs/30)+decryptor_mod+ little_lottery(after 1.4 patch)
me:-4+round_down(oryginal_me/30)+decryptor_mod
pe:-4+round_down(oryginal_pe/30)+decryptor_mod

If bpc runs after formula is 0 ... invention fail too, so this my be 'lost thing' that ppl dont consider in calculation.

Example:
Encryption lev = 4 -> 1.08 modifier
science I = 4 -> 1.08 modifier
science II = 4 -> 1.08 modifier
best descryptor =1.3
item in use = 0.07 (best!?!) -> 1.07 modifier

That give you around 75% of succes.
When you dont use items only skils .. succes rate is around 25%

Seams resonable for me... any commnts so far?
---------------------------------
Have a nice day

---

Quote:

---

The formula for runs was already correctly* posted in this thread and looks nothing like the above. Try getting MaxRunsInputBP, MaxRunsOutputBP(no, the two are nearly never the same) and ActualRunsInputBPC in there.

---

Quote:

---

Furthermore, most important comment, the whole formula has a max(1;formula) around it (*that was missing from the formula post). There are no jobs failing cause of 0 runs.

---

Quote:

---

About chance, i have a good guess about the formula and its wildly different from yours ;). I do need more statistics for any real hint of validity though.

---

Originally by: ShadowRat

---

...

---

Originally by: Khajit Smitty

---

hows does the max() function work in the above formulae?

if max(a;b) then does it take the bigger of the two numbers?

---

Originally by: Meau

---

Concerning runs, i nearly fully agree with qual. I just include a 1/10 factor and use actual maxrun numbers of the BPC type(f.e. 10 for T2 cruisers, not 1).

Runs = max(1;Round.Down( (ActualRunsInputBPC/MaxRunsInputBPC) * (MaxRunsOutputBPC/10) + DecryptorBonusRuns))

---

Originally by: Qual

---

Originally by: Meau

---

Concerning runs, i nearly fully agree with qual. I just include a 1/10 factor and use actual maxrun numbers of the BPC type(f.e. 10 for T2 cruisers, not 1).

Runs = max(1;Round.Down( (ActualRunsInputBPC/MaxRunsInputBPC) * (MaxRunsOutputBPC/10) + DecryptorBonusRuns))

---

Well... Does not really work with rigs and modules. Rigs bpc's can have 1000 runs. Modules usually around 300. That would result in much larger resulting runs using your formula.

---

Originally by: CosmoTrader

---

How can I define meta item level?

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Just something which i'm not sure if people have investigated, but the more you invent something, the less likely it seems you'll have success it seems.

Case example, i did three successful inventions in a row of an item. All had less and less favourable messages as output. I then successfully predicted the fourth attempt would fail. I waited a day, then sent off another attempt, the 5th was successful, but had the same success message as my 3rd attempt, which was the least favourable of the initial success attempts

---

Originally by: darkst0rm

---

Edited by: darkst0rm on 29/03/2007 06:21:48
I've had a look at the database export and from what I can tell all the warp disruptor's have a meta-level of 1.

I'm not sure if this is outdated database but it sure makes inventing warp distruptor II alot harder.

I thought faint should have meta-level 4, and fleeting should have meta-level 3. etc.

Is there an easier or in-game method to check an item's meta-level.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

Latest 4/3/3, no decryptor, with covetor, on SiSi tests:

8 fail, 1 success.

It doesn't look like the covetor is adding much if anything to the job...which if the meta level is low (as would be indicated by data dumps) would be expected.

Putting in more tests now.

---

Originally by: Meau

---

Problems arise where less than 4 named versions exist.

---

Originally by: ShadowRat

---

Acording to inputs by ppl here succes rate formula can looks like this:

succes_rate= (1+encryption.lev/10)*(1+related_science1.lev/10)*(1+related_science2.lev/10)*(1+(meta_item.lev*5+5)/10)*modyfier_decryptor


There is low skill weight.. so you put 1.01,1.02, ...1.05 at max lev for 3 skils...
If item is put into invention you got 1.05,1.10,...1.25 modyfier at last from meta level of item.
If there is no item this part is eqal to 1.
Modyfier_decryptor is like we know, in example 1.3 for best descryptor.

So best chance is:
1.05*1.05*1.05*1.25*1.3=> 88%
if no item and decryptor
1.05*1.05*1.05=> 15%-16%

Some ppl imputs in this thread:
In order:
encryptionscience Iscience IImeta_levdecryptorSUCCESmetaleverror_rangePPL_SUCCES_REPORTED

1.041.041.041.251.382.790447.178.50%
1.041.041.041.151.368.16716827.7061%
1.041.041.041.21.375.478784316.650%
1.041.041.041.251.382.7904416.6100%
1.041.041.041.051.353.543936033.333%
1.041.041.041.21.148.482048311.155.55%
1.011.011.011103.0301noitem9.142%
1.031.031.031.21.370.4654123472%
1.041.041.041.251.382.7904411.177%
1.041.041.041.251.382.790441080%

As you see imputs are in range of this function +/- error range
I wonder why dev put here 0.4 decryptor... This sugest another few more paramets that help to get succes rate.


So.. use best items (if exist) and best decryptor.. :P
-------------
Have Nice Day

P.S.
No point in max function :P If you got 0 BPC you fail :P

---

Originally by: ShadowRat

---

P.S.
No point in max function :P If you got 0 BPC you fail :P

---

Originally by: Bambi

---

Going back a long time I read somewhere that the base chance for success on modules was in the region of 40% and it was 20% for ships.

Sorry if this throws excement into the circular ventilation system

---

Originally by: Daerkannon Shimmerscale

---

Stuff

---

Quote:

---

Also remember that you have the option of adding a Tech I item (of the correct type) to the job (adding a Tech II item does nothing). The better the metal-level of the item, the greater the chance of success is when using it.

---

Originally by: Sir Emi

---

I can confirm the success rate for modules has been cut in half in the 27 or 28 march downtime, acording to my success data...

Stealth nerf for sure.

---

Originally by: Meau

---

[
Only tech II is explicitly ruled out, but i guess adding a Tech I item means an item under the Tech I group in the variants tab, excluding those under storyline, faction or "deadspace"(what officer loots seems to be called), which are different groups.

Anybody willing to sacrifice a few faction items for the good cause? ^^

---

Originally by: Brolly

---

I've done 10 jobs using the same materials, they being: Invulnerability field me 20 BPC, installation guide, standard T2 invulnerability field for meta item.

9/10 of these have been a success with caldari encryption 4, hydromagnetic physics 3 and quantum physics 3

Intresting thing is, I have done 5 jobs with a BPC 5 run (4 succesful) and 5 with a 25 run (5 successful). Thing is, both have the same production runs, that being 4.

Got 4 days until I try again with a BPC 100 run, in which time I will have hydromagnetic physics up to 4.

Surely there should be a difference in runs that you get on a 5 and 25 run BPC.

---

Originally by: Sir Emi

---

I can confirm the success rate for modules has been cut in half in the 27 or 28 march downtime, acording to my success data...

Stealth nerf for sure.

---

Originally by: Bermag

---

Have you verified that using a less than max run BPC don't effect the chance of success ?

If you have got a 1 run BPC with a 1 run input BPC then sure it looks like the formula for runs mentioned above seems right.

However maybe it has some impact and if you have less than max runs on your BPC it will lower the chance of success. The ration between actual run / max runs is one factor of the total probability of success.

Only one way to prove it. Do like 100 jobs with max run bpc and compare it with 100 runs of 1 run bpc.

---

Originally by: Meau

---

I guess there are no hidden chance modifiers, and the most astonishing thing is that there seems to be no influence of ME and PE, which is far more interesting than no influence from copy number, station type, whatever, cause thats to be expected.

---

It was done in a rush, they will probably add the ME / PE modifier later. They definetely had time to add a hidden modifier , try setting 10 jobs and getting them all at once, you'll see...

Space Odyssey Maker...

Originally by: Kaven Kantrix

---

So Qual, you seem to have perfectly nailed down exactly what the resulting BPC will be IF your job succeeds. Thats awesome.

Have you figured out the change of actual success/failure?

Many other people have put forth success/failure forumla's, but not you.

---

Originally by: Sufjan Stevens

---

Can you use a t2 item as the meta item? if so is it better/as good as the best t1 meta item?

---

Originally by: Aykido

---

Trinity with a 300 run BPC you would get 10 runs +encryptor run modifier.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

Well, thanks to the stealth nerf on invention, my previous success rate datasets are worth exactly two things: Jack and ****. And Jack got podded.

Since then on TQ I've attempted about 10 hulk inventions with no success with 4/4/4 skills and a mixture of Test Reports and Stolen Formulas, and with covetors. I'm a bit peeved.

However, I had a few jobs pending on Singularity. Delivered them (4/3/3 skills there, and the jobs were no decryptor but with a covetor) and got 75% success....so maybe the stealth nerf is rolled back some with the new build? Oveur accidentally misplace the decimal point with the current invention success rate perhaps?

Guess we'll see tomorrow.

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Has anyone else noticed a decreased chance of success with increasing BPC run size? Or could this just be down to chance?

---

Originally by: Qual

---

Nerf? There has been no nerf. You are experincing really bad luck. It happens.

---

Originally by: Anfauglith

---

I do think some tweaking has been made, cause the sucess rate has dropped A LOT. Using decryptors I've even yet to get a single sucess. (The one adding more runs)

And without decryptors I've gotten 2x 10-runs out of 5 tries on warp disruptors II's and 1/4 on vagabonds.

---

Originally by: Pale NPastey

---

The formulas you number crunchers out there come up with just make my head hurt. How can you guys go back and forth and assume you're correct with such limited information. Forgive me for trolling but the hardcore formulas presented here are a joke! Can't we agree that the majority of what we're all workng under (for the foreseeable future) is educated guesses and assumptions? I do (assume) think it's safe to assume that CCP will be making stealth adjustments to the sucess percentages of individual items for a while. 1) theres no way to predict the outcome until you cut it loose and see what happens, it can be so easy that they're as available and cheap as T1. 2)It seems that it'd be asking for headaches to announce every tweak to every item (cloak sucess percentages being dropped 2% today at downtime, something else increased 5%, etc. and see that daily) People would blow a gasket over every item and adjustment.
The successes/failures, attempts and general information is the only helpful stuff here. We can't come up with hard fomulas without a lot more time and information. Course....it would be nice if ccp would just release the percentages..
FYI-5 Hulk atempts, all using 10 run (max) bpc's with ME/PE 0, coveter as base item and 1.1 sucess decrypter
first 3 attempts, skill were 3/4/4 - All Failed
4th and 5th attempt had skills at 4/4/4-1 success. 2-run -4ME/PE

---

Originally by: Ricdic

---

Yeh cloak has always seemed to be an exception to the T1 rule. Hell, we never even got the T1 bpo's seeded.

---

Originally by: Kaaii

---

Another player "finishes" (delivers) the job. This has no effect on the outcome right?? If player 1 has all skills, player 2 has none but delivers? Im thinking "probably" not, but I had an instance where my skills were lower than the starters(job) skills and when i delivered the job, it failed, bad luck i suppose but it got me thinking...

---

Originally by: Daerkannon Shimmerscale

---

Originally by: Kaaii

---

Another player "finishes" (delivers) the job. This has no effect on the outcome right?? If player 1 has all skills, player 2 has none but delivers? Im thinking "probably" not, but I had an instance where my skills were lower than the starters(job) skills and when i delivered the job, it failed, bad luck i suppose but it got me thinking...

---

I would think that is safe to assume that whomever delivers the job has no effect on the outcome of the job since that's consistent with how the rest of the manufacturing discipline works. If I pop in a job at PE5 and later a corp mate with PE3 delivers it, it doesn't suddenly cost more minerals.

---

Quote:

---

succes_rate= (1+encryption.lev/10)*(1+related_science1.lev/10)*(1+related_science2.lev/10)*(1+(meta_item.lev*5+5)/10)*modyfier_decryptor

---

Originally by: Mazhius

---

Edited by: Mazhius on 05/04/2007 11:52:14

Quote:

---

succes_rate= (1+encryption.lev/10)*(1+related_science1.lev/10)*(1+related_science2.lev/10)*(1+(meta_item.lev*5+5)/10)*modyfier_decryptor

---

I suspect this is latest formula that we assumed is close to reality?

with skills at lvl 4, 1.3 decryptor and meta_item.lev4 it gives result of 12.4852(1.4*1.4*1.4*3.5*1.3) and this number just confuses me (I'm not the maths specialist though.. )

shouldn't it be devided by 100, not 10 in each case? it would give result of 1.8279 (1.04*1.04*1.04*1.25*1.3), what cout be assumed a 82.79% succes chance?

Ofcourse it should also be multiplied by a 'base chance' - which I suspect is not a costant but variable figure. As someone previuosly spotted, this number could vary based on global attemts or succes figures. I can assume that it changes on each dt, summarising all activities of previuost DT to DT period (EDIT: or rather week - as per dt is too short to make reasonable influece)per item - in this way it would not only add randomnes to invention, but also would influece prices of t2 items - making them more stable due to higher cost per item for inventor (what is also should be quite important issue for dev and players).

Thus, if the above is close to truth, invention of less profitable items has a bigger chance of succes as less people are attempting it.

But I wont be surprissed if I'm totally wrong...

---

Originally by: Salvis Tallan

---

I still believe this base success chance does not change each dt or anything like that(unless its a patch and done on purpose).

---

Originally by: Dyeadmheet

---

I don't think it changes automatically, or that it's changed at EVERY downtime, but I do think that these base success probabilities have been changed on certain items in order to keep their price from dropping "too low."

If core prices drop too far and some items drop too far in price again, these base chances will be changed to compensate.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

My own invention experience:

Covert Ops Cloak attempts: 7
Successes: 4
Failures: 3

Relevent skills are all at level 4. Best success decryptor used every time, with a Proto Cloak I used as the base item.

So, it looks like slightly better than even odds for the cloak invention at my present skill level.

---

Originally by: Mazhius

---

Edited by: Mazhius on 05/04/2007 11:52:14

Quote:

---

succes_rate= (1+encryption.lev/10)*(1+related_science1.lev/10)*(1+related_science2.lev/10)*(1+(meta_item.lev*5+5)/10)*modyfier_decryptor

---

I suspect this is latest formula that we assumed is close to reality?

with skills at lvl 4, 1.3 decryptor and meta_item.lev4 it gives result of 12.4852(1.4*1.4*1.4*3.5*1.3) and this number just confuses me (I'm not the maths specialist though.. )

shouldn't it be devided by 100, not 10 in each case? it would give result of 1.8279 (1.04*1.04*1.04*1.25*1.3), what cout be assumed a 82.79% succes chance?

Ofcourse it should also be multiplied by a 'base chance' - which I suspect is not a costant but variable figure. As someone previuosly spotted, this number could vary based on global attemts or succes figures. I can assume that it changes on each dt, summarising all activities of previuost DT to DT period (EDIT: or rather week - as per dt is too short to make reasonable influece)per item - in this way it would not only add randomnes to invention, but also would influece prices of t2 items - making them more stable due to higher cost per item for inventor (what is also should be quite important issue for dev and players).

Thus, if the above is close to truth, invention of less profitable items has a bigger chance of succes as less people are attempting it.

But I wont be surprissed if I'm totally wrong...

---

Originally by: ShadowRat

---

So best chance is:
1.05*1.05*1.05*1.25*1.3=> 88%
if no item and decryptor
1.05*1.05*1.05=> 15%-16%

---

Originally by: Daerkannon Shimmerscale

---

(Base Chance) x (1+Skill1x0.05) x (1+Skill2x0.05) x (1+Skill3x0.05) x MetaMod x Decryptor

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

This latest data/formula approximations appear to be getting closer to agreement, it seems.

There is another factor that we aren't able to test or investigate, of course--the random number generator that CCP uses to "roll" the job. Depending on what they're using and the frequency of seed renewal, this could also account for the failure "clusters" some people get while simultaneously avoiding the whole "CCP Shadowy Market Manipulation" issue. However, unless a dev comes forward with the info there's no way we can be certain....and it might be better if they don't to prevent people from gaming the system.

Anyway, my testing has been somewhat interrupted due to RL concerns and the like, however I'll be setting up for a slew of tests within a few days or so.

Many thanks to everyone that has contributed and helped so far; Invention IS the future of T2 production and so everyone's contribution helps everyone else in determining how that future will be shaped.

---

Originally by: sahtila

---

Edited by: sahtila on 06/04/2007 18:32:24
Anyone played with idea that Basechance is derived straight from number of datacores in job? My own limited experience seems to show that modules needing 1+1 datacores are easier than 2+2 modules, and frigate inventin is much easier than cruiser invention. I would not be surprised if there is only one equation for all invention success rate, both modules and ships. And ships would be more difficult to invent only because a) they need more datacores usually b) t1 base item (ships) are meta level 0 or 1.

Hmm could base success chance be something like 1/2^(amount of datacores/2).

---

Originally by: Lord Dynastron

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

When you say 2nd best, you mean Test Reports?

And yes, so far all my testing has not used any decryptors except for my initial "it works!" hulk invention testing.

I just finished the "naked" testing with no decryptors and no covetor...I'm now testing with a covetor but still no decryptor to get a feel for how much the cov helps.

And since it seems to escape a few people, yes this is all on singularity, the test server, where everything is 100 isk.

---

yeppers, test reports.... on tranquility.

---

Originally by: sahtila

---

Edited by: sahtila on 06/04/2007 18:32:24
Anyone played with idea that Basechance is derived straight from number of datacores in job? My own limited experience seems to show that modules needing 1+1 datacores are easier than 2+2 modules, and frigate inventin is much easier than cruiser invention. I would not be surprised if there is only one equation for all invention success rate, both modules and ships. And ships would be more difficult to invent only because a) they need more datacores usually b) t1 base item (ships) are meta level 0 or 1.

Hmm could base success chance be something like 1/2^(amount of datacores/2).

---

Originally by: Aidyn Avery

---

question for the inventors out there: Do you have to attmept one run at a time for invention...i would like to try for example to obtain covert op cloak 10 times...do i have to install 10 jobs separately. or this there a simple way have the job try 10 runs using up only one lab slot?

---

Quote:

---

Yea, the T2 markets in several categories are all crashing badly; a nerf was bound to happen.

---

Originally by: sahtila

---

Hmm could base success chance be something like 1/2^(amount of datacores/2).

---

Originally by: Meau

---

Chance = BaseChance * Decryptor * (1 + Skill1 * 0,02) * (1 + Skill2 * 0,02) * (1 + EncryptionsSkill * 0,02) * (1 + Metalevel * 0,5)

(base chance 20% and 75%, for cruisers 15%)

---

CoresFormula 1Formula 2

10.7943743240.697721348
20.6310305670.648960051
30.501274480.592332953
40.3981995760.526571201
80.1585629020.138905263
160.025142can't handle

Originally by: Kaylee Zara

---

Dominique, if the number of datacores used is involved (which I'm not convinced of yet) I'd suggest that your BaseChance must still involve some form of modifier based on the type of job ship/module/rig the job uses.

---

Originally by: Kaylee Zara

---

Reasoning: Not allowing for a difference between ships and modules means that Frigate invention jobs, which need 2 of each core, and Module invention jobs (also the 2 of each core variety) would have the same base chance. This seems very unlikely given we know ship invention is supposed to be harder.

---

Originally by: Kaylee Zara

---

Whether the number of datacores has an effect or not I think the base chance is based on the Data Interface that the job requires. This would give different base chances for rigs, modules and ships. This may or may not be modified by the number of datacores.

---

Originally by: Kaylee Zara

---

I also think those numbers are far too high at the top end for those formulas to be anywhere close. I'm only sitting at around 60% success with 2x2 datacore jobs using a meta level 0 item and +1.3 decryptor.

---

Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin

---

I'll try to invent a series of Taranis on singularity, to contrast the Hulk.

As an aside, I got lucky with my latest hulk inventions and scored a 10-run. I get to eat well tonight!

Also as another aside, when pricing out the T2 components needed to build said 10 hulks (at -8ME! ), I found that it was cheaper by HALF to build them from the advanced materials. Interesting stuff.

---

Originally by: Nedolzna Ovcica

---

btw, how is that, people get different number of runs... i alway got 14 run ME -7 PE -2 for modules and 5 run ME -7 PE -2 for ships...

do u use max run BPCs or no?

---

Originally by: Aidyn Avery

---

btw, are people getting similiar results to me with ship .4 decryptors?

---

Originally by: Aidyn Avery

---

btw, are people getting similiar results to me with ship .4 decryptors?

---

Originally by: Pizi

---

Originally by: Aidyn Avery

---

btw, are people getting similiar results to me with ship .4 decryptors?

---

with 444 in skills and that decryptor im at 12 trys 0 success

---

Originally by: Phasics

---

also has anyone done testing without decryptors ? from the numbers I would be guess the best outcome would be 10run with -4ME -4PE and a 1x success chance.

migth save people some iskies trying without decrptors ?

---

Originally by: Dominique Vasilkovsky

---

Originally by: Pizi

---

Originally by: Aidyn Avery

---

btw, are people getting similiar results to me with ship .4 decryptors?

---

with 444 in skills and that decryptor im at 12 trys 0 success

---

Is that with or without T1 ships used? What size ships?

I should have 20 ship attempts completed by Sunday as well and with a bit of luck CCP might sort out my stuck jobs on SiSi next week for some more in depth testing.

---

Originally by: Phasics

---

Edited by: Phasics on 14/04/2007 08:45:53
Has anyone consider that skills may be like skill for earning RP ?

and that getting that final 5th level of the skill give the biggest boost to the RP/Day

could somthing similar be happening here , I've yet to see much data from people with 5/5/5 or even 4/5/5

also has anyone done testing without decryptors ? from the numbers I would be guess the best outcome would be 10run with -4ME -4PE and a 1x success chance.

migth save people some iskies trying without decrptors ?

---

Originally by: Yarrr Rabble

---

Item Meta Level: 1 (Ships...duh!!)

---