Ossa Sepia

December 20, 2015

Foxy's Dismal Scribblings on Euloran Exploration Data or Truly Horrible Numbers

Filed under: Eulora — Diana Coman @ 1:57 a.m.

Like any other computer game, Eulora is on some level made of numbers. Unlike most other computer games, at this time Eulora seems to be quite often made of not just any numbers but rather truly horrible -borderline aggressive, "give me your money"- numbers.

But you have a choice, as you *always* have a choice, my dearly beloved reader. So here it is, The Choice: either read further, going headfirst into those numbers at your own increasing discomfort *or* ignore them at your own misfortune that will quickly and quite surely come. Without further warning, here is a basic summary of around 4 months of sticking the hoe (and the axe and the pickaxe and even elusive purple snails, scrolls, keys or anything else that came handy) into euloran soil:

    1. Total exploring attempts with *anything*1: 353`026
    2. Successful2 attempts: 76`213
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 276`813
    4. Success rate: ~22% (21.6)
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: if you dig your 10 toes in Euloran soil, you can take out of it about 2-toes worth of resources. And lose all 10 toes, of course. Cruddy Toes, that is.

    1. Total exploring attempts with tools, namely CH (Cruddy Hoe), SA (Stone Adze), SP (Stone Pickaxe), ICH (Improved Cruddy Hoe), ISA (Improved Stone Adze), ISP (Improved Stone Pickaxe)): 211`819
    2. Successful attempts: 70`104
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 141`715
    4. Success rate: ~33%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: if you value your toes and dig with 10 tools instead, you'll get about 3-toes worth of resources. And still have the toes, although not the 10 tools, of course.

    1. Total exploring attempts bare handed: 133`869
    2. Successful attempts: 5`784
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 128`085
    4. Success rate: ~4%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: if you think your hands are better than your toes, you are deluded. But if you maintain the same delusion long enough, occasionally it will pay you a little something - possibly just enough to make sure you don't look for another delusion.

    1. Total exploring attempts with CH (Cruddy Hoe): 187`554
    2. Successful attempts: 63`736
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 123`818
    4. Success rate: ~34%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: Foxy used Hoes way more any other tool, bare hands included. Possibly for that reason, possibly for another, she also got best success rates on it. Where "best" is about three and a half out of ten.

    1. Total exploring attempts with SA (Stone Adze): 9`430
    2. Successful attempts: 2`387
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 7`043
    4. Success rate: ~25%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: none really.

    1. Total exploring attempts with SP (Stone Pickaxe): 9`596
    2. Successful attempts: 2`909
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 6`687
    4. Success rate: ~30%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: Pickaxes are better than Adzes? Or just more used, but in all fairness, Foxy used more pickaxes precisely because of the empirical observation that yes, they seem to be better (at least for Foxy).

    1. Total exploring attempts with ICH (Improved Cruddy Hoe): 4`427
    2. Successful attempts: 931
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 3`496
    4. Success rate: ~21%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: the new definition of "improved" is going from 34% to 21% success rate. Long (and painfully) live improvements!

    1. Total exploring attempts with ISA (Improved Stone Adze): 255
    2. Successful attempts: 33
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 222
    4. Success rate: ~13%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: those numbers are too small to say anything. Pessimists note however that an Adze is an Adze improved or not and therefore good for nothing other than hitting yourself in the head.

    1. Total exploring attempts with ISP (Improved Stone Pickaxe): 557
    2. Successful attempts: 108
    3. Unsuccessful attempts: 449
    4. Success rate: ~19%
    5. Possible optimistic conclusion: numbers are still too small to say anything. Pessimistically, they are just too horrible to say anything, of course.

Note: The lowest level of Euloran quality in writing (or scribbling if you prefer) is "dismal"3. Which reflects the levels of depth touched -or rather untouched- by this brief analysis. Brief it may be, but it's still the first ever, not to mention only one to draw on such a large data set and make it public, too! Add your two cents to it if you feel inclined, but perhaps keep in mind the above success rates.

If you made it this far, here's a picture too:

tools_success_ratio


  1. More precisely: tiny, small and even ordinary enums of all sorts, keys, worthless putrid leather, elusive purple snail.  

  2. Success is defined as "got a claim to show for the effort" - regardless of type of claim or anything else. 

  3. As in the famous tomes that might even teach you a skill or two: "Foxy's Dismal Scribblings on Gathering" or "Foxy's Dismal Scribblings on Building" 

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <pre> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Theme and content by Diana Coman