[Research] Map increased item quantity (IIQ% ) and its role in map sustainability

"

So we can conclude one of the following:
A) Chris is a liar
B) There's some bug in IIQ.
C) The OP has errors, intentional or otherwise, in his methodology or analysis.

Statistics are hard to do properly and easy to misinterpret, map IIQ should be easy to code and well layout, Chris has no reason to lie and many reasons to tell the truth.

I'm going with option C.

I think I'll stick with Chris's advice and ignore the OP's.

You forgot option D

D) Chris didn't really address the point, he simply muddied (intentionally?) the water by bringing up irrelevant-but-seemingly-relevant points.

OP: IIQ doesn't seem to do much for high tier map sustain, here are my 400 sample results

Chris: BUT WHAT BOUT ALL DEM GROTTOS YOU ARENT COUNTING

OP: Facepalm

Fanboys: BUT UR SAMPLE SIZE ISNT 7 MILLION AND CHRIS SAID YOU WERE WRONG

"

Zaanus wrote:

You forgot option D

D) Chris didn't really address the point, he simply muddied (intentionally?) the water by bringing up irrelevant-but-seemingly-relevant points.

OP: IIQ doesn't seem to do much for high tier map sustain, here are my 400 sample results

Chris: BUT WHAT BOUT ALL DEM GROTTOS YOU ARENT COUNTING

OP: Facepalm

Fanboys: BUT UR SAMPLE SIZE ISNT 7 MILLION AND CHRIS SAID YOU WERE WRONG

The drops outside the range matter because the OP didn't control the tier of map properly(or many other things for that matter). I would expect a map drop in a T9 has higher odds of being T7+ than a drop in a T7.

The base map drop rate is so low that even doubling it has seemingly very little effect.

"

Nephalim wrote:

The base map drop rate is so low that even doubling it has seemingly very little effect.

More like: The base map drop rate is variable, determined by a seed, so that even tripling it with quantity mods can have seemingly very little effect in a low seed and having no quantity at all can rain maps in a high seed.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

"

Nephalim wrote:

The base map drop rate is so low that even doubling it has seemingly very little effect.

More like: The base map drop rate is variable, determined by a seed, so that even tripling it with quantity mods can have seemingly very little effect in a low seed and having no quantity at all can rain maps in a high seed.

Can you clarify what you mean by a seed?

a map seed

plant one in a hi iiq map and watch the lil tier 1 maps grow

"

Nephalim wrote:

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

"

Nephalim wrote:

The base map drop rate is so low that even doubling it has seemingly very little effect.

More like: The base map drop rate is variable, determined by a seed, so that even tripling it with quantity mods can have seemingly very little effect in a low seed and having no quantity at all can rain maps in a high seed.

Can you clarify what you mean by a seed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_seed

youre saying GGG randomly decrease and increases the seed for no reason instead of using a static global base drop value?

"

Nephalim wrote:

youre saying GGG randomly decrease and increases the seed for no reason instead of using a static global base drop value?

No, I'm saying the seed will determine the base drop rate. Therefore it varies.

I'm not saying GGG don't alter parameters, they probably do. But there's no way that the base map drop rate is static. I'd go as far to say the mods on the map are less relevant than the variable base. Look at high %ipd (map mods) on a lvl 1 weapon base (map), doesn't do shit without that base flat phys (variable depending on seed).

"

So we can conclude one of the following:
A) Chris is a liar
B) There's some bug in IIQ.
C) The OP has errors, intentional or otherwise, in his methodology or analysis.

Statistics are hard to do properly and easy to misinterpret, map IIQ should be easy to code and well layout, Chris has no reason to lie and many reasons to tell the truth.

I'm going with option C.

I would like to point out that you do a terrible job of experimental controls.

I think I'll stick with Chris's advice and ignore the OP's.

What advice does Chris give, exactly? To stop complaining? The only reason Chris replied at all is because he is defensive and doesn't like people complaining about drops. If this analysis had been done in 100% the exact same way but instead showed that IIQ had a huge effect on drops and map sustain was easy, he would've replied with "Thanks for the valuable feedback and hard work!"

I think people are getting really carried away here. OP's post was meant to just take a look at a small section of data as it relates to mid-tier maps and the effect of IIQ on same tier drops.

Anyone who dislikes his findings (which is okay) should do some of the leg work and help us create a better picture of map sustain, because the more the merrier!