Proving 'Success have a greater chance of giving a skillup'

[Craftah]

Ok, here is the idea:

Find an enchanter (or two/three) with too many AA points who has not done any JC yet.

Have them buy all three levels of JC Mastery, equip a geerlok, sit down in front of a vendor and go to 250.

With the 50% reduction in failures, the toon should hit 250 in a significantly smaller number of combines than the rest of us who skilled up before JC Mastery was available.

Any takers?

[Toramund]

Well, my ench is only lvl 30 Craftah, I can't help you out although I'd love to .

Shoul you also take into consideration their intelligence at the beginning too? And any stat increasing buffs? i.e. KEI, stuff like that. I mean, so if you do use 2 or 3 enchanters for this, one doesnt have a 255 int, and another has above that as a result of those "too many AAs" .

[Delfontes]

Find an enchanter (or two/three) with too many AA points who has not done any JC yet.

Yes, then find one of the same level that never trained meditation.

Should turn up similar results.

[Toramund]

Are enchanters the only ones allowed to put points into JC Mastery?

If not, couldn't you just get some other class to do it?

[Delfontes]

Are enchanters the only ones allowed to put points into JC Mastery?

Yes.

If not, couldn't you just get some other class to do it?

See above.

[Toramund]

Well don't that suck .

Hmm, ok, how bout this, we find a couple enchanters, and steal their skill points =P.

[Taraddar]

Personally I don't see this a being a very viable test.

1) I don't see you finding you magical enchanter easily and several tests would be needed to show an actual definite relation.

2) your bringing in an otherwise unkown factor, the aa, into the situation. Who knows what this does that might or might not effect the skill up rate.

3) JC is already a normally pretty low fail rate skill to get up since you have lots of different combines to work with and you usually are working on something pretty close to trivial.

Several people have sugguested the newbie test with 2 identical newbie doing something like baking. One does fish rolls from 0 to 100something where they triv. The other does several different intermidate receipes. Repeat a couple times to limit random luck's influence.

[kiztent]

There's actually a much easier way to do this:

Take a naked whoever.

Load them up with the following:
yeast
hops
malt
casks

Make mead until trivial

Delete them. Make another one.

Add barley to above, make Ol' Tujim's to skill 41.

Compare skills ups on a success versus skill ups on a failure. In theory, the toon making the mead should skill up faster.

Repeat a dozen or so times for both scenarios.

Or, heck, just make fish rolls to 135 on a dozen characters. Any recipie will work fine. You just take the following formula:

(percent skill up on success * percent failure) / (percent skill up on failure * percent success)

edit: (skill up on success * failures) / (skill up on failure * successes) is probably easier to calculate and the same number.


If the result is one, success or failure makes no difference. If it is greater than one, then successes helped skill ups, and if it's less than one, failures helped skill ups.

[Greymantle]

Well donn't know if this info helps. But i have been skilling my ranger up in brewing latley by making fetid essece. Got him up to 49 atm, but last run was 60 combines, had 2 sucesses but got 19 skill ups. wis/int no hell just over 100 on each. None of the skill ups were on the 2 sucsess.

[PinyonTreedotter]

Okies, here are my data:

Did Jewelcraft from 0 to 200. Wisdom was 255 the entire time. I did the "normal" process of moving to the next higher trivial when one gem was trivial. I ignored Black Pearls, Diamonds, Blue Diamonds, Wolf's Eye Agate, and Fire Opals.

I'm too lazy to do the entire run (OK, so I kinda misplaced some of my data), but my last data sheet had from 153 to 200, 47 skill increases.

47 Skill Increases
658 Combines = 14 combines/skill increase
44 Failures (= 0.0669 failure rate)
47 Skill Increases on a success
0 Skill Increases on a failure

If the chance of skill increase is the same for success and failure, then the chance of 47 skill increases entirely on successes is (1-0.0669)^47 = 0.03866. This is smaller than the nominative p value of 0.05.

Conclusion: There is sufficient evidence at the 5% significance level to conclude that skill increases come more often with successes than with failures.

(Don'cha just love statistics !) I had done a similar analysis with my fletching with another character and the p value was just slightly over 5%, but with less data.

[kiztent]

If the chance of skill increase is the same for success and failure, then the chance of 47 skill increases entirely on successes is (1-0.0669)^47 = 0.03866. This is smaller than the nominative p value of 0.05.

Ugh, I'd have to remeber a lot of statistics to say why I don't believe it. I'll settle for GiGo. Your results are skewed toward successes anyway.

I'm almost tempted to fire off a bunch on MHB combines to 'prove' that skill ups come on failures.

[Delfontes]

I have a screen shot of going 249 and 250 in 2 consecutive failed combines.

That batch of Kail Constitutionals I had an above average 65% or so success rate.

I personally have probably gotten more skill-up's on failures than on success, but I have a nasty habit of skipping steps and making things with very high trivials from the get go.

In my humble opinion, though stated otherwise by Vi/Sony (or so I'm told), is that if there is a higher chance to skill-up on a success, it is very slight.

[kiztent]

OK, so I decided that rather than complain about the methodolgy, I'd test it myself.

The scenario:
level 1 dark elf mage of innoruuk with maxed int (134)
120 heady kiola combines
1 trained the first point, the other 2 didn't

The results (number - skill points - percent chance to skill):
#1:
48 success - 18 skill - .375
72 failure - 14 skill - .194

#2
42 success - 15 skill - .357
78 failure - 14 skill - .179

#3
38 success - 9 skill - .237
82 failure - 19 skill - .231

overall:
128 - 42 - .328
232 - 47 - .202

I don't know how to calculate a standard deviation, but it looks like there is a correlation in this small run. Plus I got 128 heady kiolas for 86 pp 9 gp 5 sp.

I'd invite people to try this simple experiement and post the results.

[Boleslav]

I did a test with two JC toons when this idea was being discussed quite some time ago.

The toons had identical stats. One of them made Gold Amber combines from 0 to 100. The other followed Gumkak's guide using the next closest trivial item from 0 to 100.

The toon that did the gold-amber combine (trivial at 102) from 1 to 100 took 20% more combines to reach 100 than the toon that used the next highest trivial item.

I did some other research where I noted whether each individual skillup came from a successful or a failed ccombine. I weighted the results using the infamous 'success probability formula'. The results of that testing were pretty convincing to me.

An easy test might be Mino Hero Brew from 1 to 100 versus the next lowest trivial item. It is also a very good test because the Mino Hero Brew trivials so high (248) that you are still at the min chance of success at skill of 100. The test I did with the JC wasn't as dramatic because the combine was trivial at 102, so the difference in success rates wasn't as pronounced as possible. I bet the Mino Hero Brew toon would take 50% more combines than the 'next lowest trivial' toon (again, assuming stats are equal). I say 50% because that is what I extrapolated the 'success advantage' to be from the original sets of data.

Boleslav Forgehammer
Paladin of Brell in his 60th Campaign
E'ci - Destiny Awaits

[Carnilion]

Probably not enough data, but when I was making MTPs I noticed an interesting trend. At skill level 240 + spoon my skill can't get any higher, so it remained the same throughout the test. In 200 combines I succeeded 100 times and got 6 skill ups. Each skill up was on a success. My next run of MTPs got me to 250, and I am pretty sure that the last 4 skill ups were on successes also, but I will have to check my log to be sure. I also succeeded more than I failed on that run. My INT was 255 throughout btw.

Carnilion
Wizard
Druzzil Ro