[X] My Assistant

166th reforge. How much closer do i actually have to be? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

Site is finally back! (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)

*shriek*
sorry, i became a bit savage with the lack of hentai

wow the site was down for some hours

We're back baby!
Funny enough, the fjords were running no problemo (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

jug25 on dark set, 209 shards used, so i would estimate the total spent on this set at a bit less than 10m

jug25 on dark set, 209 shards used

For a whole set. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif)
170th reforge. Targeting jugg5 and a certain element5 is not really worth it. Is it?

This post has been edited by Uncle Stu: Mar 11 2019, 00:34

For a whole set. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif)
170th reforge. Targeting jugg5 and a certain element5 is not really worth it. Is it?

Yeah... double specific potencies at 5 seems to cost over 10x (shard-wise) of single potency at 5.

imo defense as 1H is pretty much of no concern already, going for that is pretty overkill.

Then again each to their playstyles lol, you and your no-SoL runs...

Precursor Artifact (100/100)
14.0 % [14] Energy Drink
20.0 % [20] 2 Hath
21.0 % [21] Last Elixir
42.0 % [42] 1000x Crystal
3.0 % [3] Primary Attributes Bonus (275/282)

Targeting jugg5 and a certain element5 is not really worth it. Is it?

at this point i would go for an IW that covers the essentials like jug5 on armour or op5 no ss on 2H and wait for the promised** IW rework to make it perfect

This post has been edited by sickentide: Mar 11 2019, 00:55

imo defense as 1H is pretty much of no concern already, going for that is pretty overkill.

I cant help it, nothing except the last rounds of a PFest can hurt me and i want to know if it is actually possible to make even them to a walk in the park.

Then again each to their playstyles lol, you and your no-SoL runs...

Non-SoL playstyle please. Run would mean that i would use SoL sometimes, what i dont and never did.

at this point i would go for an IW that covers the essentials like jug5 on armour or op5 no ss on 2H and wait for the promised** IW rework to make it perfect

I am allready beyond the point of no return. I will have Jugg5holy5 on that armor. I have allready spend way oto many shards, too much time and way too many runs to be happy with only jugg5. Tbh i allready have reforge jugg5dark1 this morning.

Targeting jugg5 and a certain element5 is not really worth it. Is it?

Probably not

man, I feel useless compared to some people's stats and credit stashes. I've been putzing around with hentaiverse for like 6 years now. I just never have enough credits to keep up with the upkeep of anything.

jug25 on dark set, 209 shards used, so i would estimate the total spent on this set at a bit less than 10m

From some IW records(Almost 50) I gathered from other IW shops, the average shards spent on a J5 is approx. 11 shards.

This post has been edited by -vincento-: Mar 11 2019, 09:47

man, I feel useless compared to some people's stats and credit stashes. I've been putzing around with hentaiverse for like 6 years now. I just never have enough credits to keep up with the upkeep of anything.

need some help? Advice, or some charity?

From some IW records(Almost 50) I gathered from other IW shops, the average shards spent on a J5 is approx. 11 shards.

It will depend on the # of possible potencies. After updating my simulator with the algorithm from https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?showtopic=221264, it seems to match its results (~15.24 for 7 possible and ~13.68 for 8 possible) after 10 million simulations. The math used in that post looks to be correct as well.

Of course, this is assuming that the assumptions used are correct (pretty much follows wiki's steps); only part where I'm uncertain about is if the order you got the potencies matters at all; i.e. currently assuming if you unlocked 2 potencies and both aren't at level 5, the chance for getting each is 37.5% and 37.5% rather than 50% and 25%.

Shard costs fluctuate quite a ton since it is not normal distribution; with 50 simulations / sample size I'm getting a huge amount of variance (tried with 50 sims *10 times and I got averages of between 8.74 and 18.20), but it stabilizes within 0.01 shards of error at around 10 million simulations.

If anyone has a larger amount of sample actual data I would appreciate it, as perhaps the system is different from what was assumed in the code after all.

Code: [pastebin.com] https://pastebin.com/HKMcKQqy

Data:
(IMG:[i.imgur.com] https://i.imgur.com/xH9KB43.png)
(IMG:[i.imgur.com] https://i.imgur.com/ePZB1es.png)

This post has been edited by t_t_z: Mar 11 2019, 12:02

-Snipe-

I see. That's a much reasonable approach. And how many IWBTH and PFD runs respectively?
Also would you mind telling me the shards and runs needed for p5s4, butcher fatality only and J5 C5 if you have simulated them? Thank you regardless.

I see. That's a much reasonable approach. And how many IWBTH and PFD runs respectively?
Also would you mind telling me the shards and runs needed for p5s4, butcher fatality only and J5 C5 if you have simulated them? Thank you regardless.

#runs would slightly depend on pxp0; it appears for J5 7P at least as pxp0 increases the # of PFD runs decreases (since more rounds per run, scaling more than total pxp required; do take into consideration that turn and stamina usage is per round and not per run however), until it hits high enough pxp0 to cap out at 100 rounds/run; then it starts increasing.

The following 90/95/99 percentages are confidence intervals.

Assuming a PXP0 of 362:

CODE

J5, 7 possible (elemental), 10^7 sims
IWBTH runs:    avg=10.89    90%:24    95%:32    99%:48
PFUDOR runs:    avg=20.80    90%:37    95%:46    99%:67
Shards cost:    avg=13.68    90%:33    95%:43    99%:67

CODE

J5, 8 possible (non-elemental), 10^7 sims
IWBTH runs:    avg=12.44    90%:28    95%:36    99%:55
PFUDOR runs:    avg=20.80    90%:37    95%:46    99%:67
Shards cost:    avg=15.24    90%:36    95%:48    99%:74

CODE

J5C5, 7 possible (elemental), 10^7 sims
IWBTH runs:    avg=149.68    90%:344    95%:447    99%:687
PFUDOR runs:    avg=58.05    90%:120    95%:154    99%:231
Shards cost:    avg=184.14    90%:425    95%:553    99%:850

CODE

J5C5, 8 possible (non-elemental), 10^7 sims
IWBTH runs:    avg=199.65    90%:459    95%:597    99%:917
PFUDOR runs:    avg=62.97    90%:132    95%:168    99%:253
Shards cost:    avg=238.58    90%:550    95%:716    99%:1101

(note that weapons in general have lower pxp0 than armor but the following is still assuming pxp0=362)

CODE

B5F4(Hollow1), 4 possible, 10^7 sims
IWBTH runs:    avg=64.18    90%:147    95%:191    99%:294
PFUDOR runs:    avg=55.41    90%:114    95%:146    99%:218
Shards cost:    avg=96.60    90%:224    95%:291    99%:448

CODE

S5P4(Hollow1), 5 possible (non-focus), 10^7 sims
IWBTH runs:    avg=106.95    90%:246    95%:320    99%:491
PFUDOR runs:    avg=62.42    90%:130    95%:166    99%:250
Shards cost:    avg=146.04    90%:338    95%:440    99%:676

Note that I am still unsure of the generalized optimal IW strategy for double potencies, currently reforging only if impossible or if any undesired potency is unlocked before both of the desired potencies are unlocked.

This post has been edited by t_t_z: Mar 11 2019, 14:05

Snipe

Thank you very much ヾ(*ΦωΦ)ツ

It seems the results I estimate according to these simulators are significantly more expensive than what I got from various shops.

This post has been edited by -vincento-: Mar 11 2019, 14:22

Thank you very much ヾ(*ΦωΦ)ツ

It seems the results I estimate according to these simulators are significantly more expensive than what I got from various shops.

Yeah I noticed that too. Trying to figure it out, it seems that in the calculation of the average, there are some super huge # of shards (sometimes over 1000, albeit very rarely) that are still taken into consideration. I believe it is either that or perhaps the shops are using a better strategy (I can't find an optimal one posted for dual potency).

Do you happen to have found/collected more data on the double potency requirements from shops? They seem very rarely requested without allowing substitutions, and even if they are, sometimes they run out of budget and end up with something else (thus may differ from my results). Looking through Kadokura's shop's logs, I found only:

IWBTH/PFF/Shards:

For J5+specific potency5, 2 usable samples and 1 skewed:
74+/20+/81+ (changed to J5C4C1)
175/51/211
32/23/39

For S5P4, 9 usable samples and 4 skewed:
60/37/82
31/18/39
102+/46+/131+ (changed to P5S3A1)
44/23/55
152+/93+/217+ (changed to P5A4)
0/13/0 (started with S1)
18/20/25
6/9/5
47/42/67 (Focus)
2/9/1
57/35/78
37/12/39
112/76/36

Allowing substitutions after running out of budget or free runs may skew it as those are not used in my simulator. Not sure how much of an impact it has, but the ones that have run out of budget will likely cost a ton more if used my simulator, maybe that leads to the discrepancy? (budget limit kind of completely removes the samples with large shard usages/such). Sample size is also very low.

It may also just be an error in the code or such (just spent quite a while looking through it / going through unit test/cases), if anyone else is interested and found a bug, please let me know. (although I know, it's very ugly and crappy code and probably very hard to understand)

In the end, I'd only recommend using the simulator as a general guideline; the variance for shard usage, especially for dual requirements seems to be very high and thus quite unpredictable (also why high confidence intervals are so much higher than the average)

This post has been edited by t_t_z: Mar 11 2019, 16:01