Skillup rate on failures ?

[Xira]

Prolly asked before, but cannot find it, sorry.

Is the skillup rate on failures the same as on success ?

(Recent experiences suspect is singificantly lower, but could be RNG of course)

[Dalur]

In my opinion from all the skilling up I've seen, it seem the higher you go, the less likely you are to gain a skill up from failures.

Early on, <125, you can fail alot and get skill ups regularly.

Between 125 and 200 it seems that it's about equal or slightly skewed in favor of successes.

After 200 it seems you rarely get skill ups on failures.

Of course, that's just my speculation.

[Nolrog]

I always thought that skill ups and successes were two totally different things, and the presence or absence of one has no determination on the other.

[eniamn]

after as many failures as i had on picnics i don't think they are related. 1 stack had a success the next had a skillup. didn't seem to come in pairs.

[Itek]

There have been many attempts to "prove" or "disprove" the notion that success is linked to skill ups. Or that successes have a higher skill up rate. Or that "closer to trivial" recipes have a better skill up rate.

The -hard- numbers seem to suggest that there -is- a very slight difference in favor of successes.

Roughly a 5% or less difference.

Meaning....

4000 failures yields 100 skill ups.

4000 successes yields 105 skill ups.

Hardly difinitive, and there are HUGE arguements about the statistical validity of the samples used in these arguements. So take it for what it's worth.

Yes. It's better to succeed than fail. Does this surprise you? It should not. You get to sell or use the product. And it's human nature to enjoy success much more than failure.

Is it so much more worthwhile to succeed than fail that it's "cost effective" to go "out of your way" to choose a more successful formula which is "harder" in some way?

Not really.

My basic example is the Misty Thicket Picnic vs. Halas Meat Pie example.

MTP cost about 100pp for 100 final combines. And have slightly less than 200 combines for the 100 final attempts. And require 1 brownie parts for 100 combines.

HMP cost about 500pp for 100 final combines. And have roughly 400 combines for that 100 final combines. And require 20 lion/mammoth meats for those 100 combines.

HMP trivial at 226, MTP never trivial. (my own estimate for them is that their effective trivial is 355)

So at a skill of 200 HMP succeed MUCH more than MTP. But they are 5 times as expensive, 20 times harder to farm, and take 4 times as long in combines.

Long ago I asked "is the skill up rate on HMP -that- much better then MTP over the range 200 - 226 to justify spending _5_TIMES_ as much plat per attempt?"

No one, let me stress that, NO ONE has EVER shown numbers of any kind to show that skilling up with the "success oriented" HMP path is even close to cost effective compared to MTP over the same range.

Will it take more "final combines" to do MTP? Yes.
Will the sales of HMPs offset the cost difference? Maybe.
Will the time saved getting more successes (and therefore -probably- more skill ups) doing HMP instead be eaten up by the extra component farming and sub-combines? Almost certainly.

In the final analysis you need to examine all the situational issues rather than just "do skill ups come faster on successes." If the cost of doing business on the "success path" is prohibitive then the "repeated failure" path begins to look more and more attractive.

There is not a "hard and fast" one true path to skilling up. There are people who swear by HMP skilling just as fervently as I swear at it.

Do you like to succeed?

or

Do you have reasons why sucess is less important?

[Xira]

Thank u very much for the info. With the numbers shown it seems to me I just had a run of strange luck.

2 bags of Tunare Silk had only 1 skillup, I was so upset I used many of my saved ribbons ahead of time to make 40 Gnomish Robes and gain 4 (Should have saved those for after 212 skill).

Tunare Silk is far more easy to obtain via bazaar, I can somewhat afford to powerskill using what I make from planar access and already maxed research, fletching and tinkering, so I'll give them one more chance.

[Nolrog]

Sometimes the RNG can be streaky. If you find a bunch of tries with no skill up, it's best to stop, and come back later (at least some people have argued).

[Tudamorf]

Originally posted by Itek
Yes. It's better to succeed than fail.

Not if you're doing Ceremonial Solstice Robes for skill gains. I cringed on every success.

As to the skill gain on success versus fail argument, I have noticed no difference whatsoever on any trade skill. I've tried to analyze my skill gain data (from the old board) to get a more scientific answer but since skill gains come so quickly, it's impossible to get a meaningful sample size.

In any case, there is either no difference at all, or the difference is so small that it doesn't matter anyway. Make whatever items you wish.

[Itek]

Tudamorf-

When I said "Yes. It's better to succed than fail" you seem to have missed something.

IN GENERAL. Being that I was speaking generally, not specifically, in a rhetorical fashion about the theory of success vs. failure as it effects skilling up I presumed this was understood.

This is one more reason for my original sig. New sig still under construction.

The numbers "show" that it's slightly more advantageous to succeed than fail for skill ups. Usually the product you are making is worthwhile. And the psychological aspects for the majority of humans provides positive feedback upon success.

In a NARROW instance, like the one you pointed out, where the product of a success is LESS valuable than the product of a failure that is not a positive outcome. Take it up with SOE. It doesn't change the truth of my statement.

Itek: It's better to succeed than fail.
Tudamorf: Not when success costs more than failure.
Itek: Gee, I -thought- I had addressed assessing the "real expenses" of various paths and the need to take that into account farther down in my post... Let me go double check...

In the final analysis you need to examine all the situational issues rather than just "do skill ups come faster on successes." If the cost of doing business on the "success path" is prohibitive then the "repeated failure" path begins to look more and more attractive.

Gee.... I addressed EXACTLY the problem of when the success is actually TOO expensive relationally to the failure. Seems that you quickly disagreed with me, while in reality you completely agree with me.

1) Sometimes success is more expensive.

2) Sample sizes and other math issues muddy the waters of the debate.

3) Make whatever you WANT to make, there isn't really a "perfect" way to go about skilling up.

I could have sworn I said exactly those 3 things.