Lt. Tapper
Posts: 1
2/9/2019
|
What am I missing? Baccarat in the House of Chimes pays 3:1 on a 20 pence bet half the time, so it averages 40 pence per play. If I burn twenty actions I'd get an average of 8 echoes. I'm sure as I get further into the game that will be less attractive but in the early game isn't that pretty good?
|
|
|
0
link
|
Azothi
Posts: 586
2/13/2019
|
Tsar Koschei wrote:
elderfleur wrote:
the endgame goal has recently jumped above 210 pence per action
What are considered the best readily repeatable money grinds these days, anyway? Discounting all that business about optimizing your deck and minimizing the amount of discardable cards. Expeditions to the Tomb of the Silken Thread funded with Strong-Backed Labour have a simulated EPA of ~2.27. This value can be significantly increased when complemented with Favours from the Docks for expedition supplies.
The orphan grind at the Court of the Wakeful Eye approaches 2.22 EPA as the number of orphans increases to minimize the cost of zailing. This entails investing in Winsome Dispossessed Orphans, which are then delivered to the Tiger Keeper for Tribute that is collected at the Court and sold to buy more children.
In my opinion, both are more properly reflective of the Victorian aesthetic than the Affair of the Box ever was. One makes a profit by selling the archaeological treasures of other cultures and the other makes money off of children.
--
Azoth I, the Emissary of Cardinals - A Paramount Presence (not currently accepting new Proteges)
Away to where the Chain cannot bind us.
 Hesperidean.
|
|
|
+9
link
|
elderfleur
Posts: 77
2/9/2019
|
Lt. Tapper wrote:
What am I missing? Baccarat in the House of Chimes pays 3:1 on a 20 pence bet half the time, so it averages 40 pence per play. If I burn twenty actions I'd get an average of 8 echoes. I'm sure as I get further into the game that will be less attractive but in the early game isn't that pretty good? Currently the "Draft a brief article" option under the "Celebrate the Feast" story pays out 50 pence on the action without any chance involved.
But your assumption is correct: the endgame goal has recently jumped above 210 pence per action, and even with stats at 100 you'll want to get around 100 pence per action. Early in the game, levelling up your stats and playing through the "Making Your Name" stories will be much more valuable in the long-run.
--
—Elderfleur
|
|
|
+7
link
|
Tyrconnell
Posts: 271
2/14/2019
|
Expeditions using Strong-Backed Labour also relies on exploiting the working class, so it's doubly Victorian theme.
--
Tyrconnell, a gentleman and doctor of diverse interests and multifarious proclivities
|
|
|
+6
link
|
Tyrconnell
Posts: 271
2/9/2019
|
It's only in the very, very early game that you can't regularly outdo 40 pence per action. And even then, it's usually better to do something that raises your stats so you get closer to being able to do better than 40 pence per action.
--
Tyrconnell, a gentleman and doctor of diverse interests and multifarious proclivities
|
|
|
+4
link
|
Toran
Posts: 193
2/14/2019
|
When you factor in the fact that you get to keep drawing cards and doing expeditions to the Nadir because you're in London, the Tomb of the Silken Thread is decidedly superior.
--
I have a Hepta-Goat. Do you have a Hepta-Goat?
https://www.fallenlondon.com/profile/Anthony%20Toran
|
|
|
+2
link
|
Azothi
Posts: 586
2/15/2019
|
idyl wrote:
Tystefy wrote:
But... where specifically should one get Strong-Backed Labour? In terms of efficiency? Just purchasing them from the side-streets is the most efficient. Unless you have a surplus of supplies ahead of time, of course. To elaborate on that, it's monetarily cheaper to purchase in the Clay Quarters, but it's not sustainable in the long term. Furthermore - and most importantly - it costs Rostygold, which is much better used in conjunction with Dock Favours, which is far and away the most efficient way to purchase expedition supplies.
--
Azoth I, the Emissary of Cardinals - A Paramount Presence (not currently accepting new Proteges)
Away to where the Chain cannot bind us.
Hesperidean.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Tyrconnell
Posts: 271
6/4/2019
|
The biggest is "A sign?" on expeditions. It gives you faster progress and doesn't consume supplies. Even occasional occurrences dramatically boost profit.
The minor oversight is that it takes only 29 supplies to complete the expedition, not 30, because the first progress is free.
--
Tyrconnell, a gentleman and doctor of diverse interests and multifarious proclivities
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Skinnyman
Posts: 2133
6/4/2019
|
Tsar Koschei wrote:
It happens every now and then that on the 10th and final action, as you get to the goal, your rival also reaches 10 progress at the same time, and taking precedence, has to be paid off. Brings down the profits a fair bit. It's so very rare that it can be easily discarded!
I think it's somewhere at 0.013%; that's once in 7570 expeditions. But we do know that RNG can be cruel sometimes!
--
ESs items and quality requirements sheet. Please check if there are errors or if something is missing
Achievement list if you're feeling bored!
I am accepting Plant battles, Neath's Mysteries card, Starveling Cats and boxed cats.
No suppers, no second chances gain and no need to cure my menaces!
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Tsar Koschei
Posts: 202
6/4/2019
|
I've had it happen at least twice over the course of a few dozen expeditions.
So yeah, factoring in the value of signs I get something in the 2,22 EPA range, maybe a bit more when you work in all the details long-term. But those damn rivals do bring it down some.
edited by Tsar Koschei on 6/4/2019
--
https://www.fallenlondon.com/profile/Tsar%20Koschei
Sanguine Ribbon Society tournament champion.
No chess, loitering, friendly sparring, coffee at Caligula's or Affluent Photographer, please.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Azothi
Posts: 586
6/5/2019
|
Tsar Koschei wrote:
However, I do wonder if those models people have built take into account the cost of having to counter rivals. It happens every now and then that on the 10th and final action, as you get to the goal, your rival also reaches 10 progress at the same time, and taking precedence, has to be paid off. Brings down the profits a fair bit. For the simulations I've looked over, confrontations are accounted for.
Simulation, Python (EPA range: ~2.24 - 2.28): This fails to account for the actions saved from multiple signs (which would increase the EPA slightly, as it takes fewer actions), as well as failing to account for the Nightmares gain from the confrontation (which would decrease the EPA slightly, as 1 CP of healing is worth 1/6 of an action). The strategy employed also accounts for confrontations by always beginning with at least 40 Supplies. It, however, fails to account for the opportunity cost of obtaining Absinthe.
Simulation, Java (EPA range: ~2.27): This accurately represents Nightmares gain, though it assumes the player will always play the optimal Nightmares reduction action (the social action). It also fails to account for actions saved from multiple signs, as well as the opportunity cost for obtaining Absinthe.
These aren't perfect, but they have taken most variables into account. The complication of obtaining Absinthe in a cost-effective way likely reduces the EPA for the whole system, but I believe it's reasonable to treat players as having sufficient Absinthe to treat it as an Echo cost in the short term. Trying to account for obtaining Absinthe is a spanner in the works, and it's likely to massively overcomplicate things for relatively little effect.
--
Mathematically, we can evaluate the effect of confrontation:
1 action
+5 CP Nightmares
-10 Absinthe
-10 Supplies
+3-5 Progress
The Nightmares will take 5/6 of an action to heal via social action. On average, 4 Progress is gained, equivalent to a sign, which means 6 Supplies are lost on average during the confrontation. Supplies are valued at 2.7 Echoes per supply, so this is 16.2 Echoes lost. Add in the 5 Echoes of Absinthe lost, and we get a loss of ~2 actions and 21.2 Echoes from the confrontation.
Comparatively, a sign gives the equivalent of 10.8 Echoes in supplies, while two signs give 21.6 Echoes while saving 1 action. Three signs give 32.4 Echoes and 1 saved action. The echoes gained from two signs balance out the echoes lost from one confrontation, at the cost of 1 action. Now we can consider the probabilities of these events.
Using the binomial formula for confrontations (which require 9 out of 10 steps to increase Rival's Progress), we have (10 C 9)*(0.5)^9*(0.5)^1 = ~0.00977 probability, or about 1%. The simulations reflect this figure.
For two signs, we have (10 C 2)*(0.05)^2*(0.95)^8 = ~0.0746 probability, or about 7.5%. In other words, one's almost ten times as likely to find two signs compared to confronting rivals. For three signs, we have (10 C 3)*(0.05)^3*(0.95)^7 = ~0.0105 probability, or about 1%. For every confrontation, one is just as likely to find three signs in one expedition.
It's like there are two opposing forces: the confrontations with rivals and the appearance of multiple signs. Both are very rare, with the appearance of multiple signs being slightly more likely to occur, but they pull against each other, leaving the final EPA at around the simplified calculation value taking neither into account, in the 2.2 - 2.3 EPA range.
--
And while it's outside the scope of your original question a few months ago ("What are considered the best readily repeatable money grinds these days, anyway?"), the ability to use Dock favours massively increases the EPA of the expedition, and for money-making purposes, the ability to stay in London and potentially draw high-value cards also increases the EPA.
The caprices of the RNG fall away as the number of trials increases, so there clearly can be rough patches and smooth patches in terms of the actual expeditions, but the math seems to suggest an EPA in the range of 2.2 to 2.3.
--
Azoth I, the Emissary of Cardinals - A Paramount Presence (not currently accepting new Proteges)
Away to where the Chain cannot bind us.
Hesperidean.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
dov
Posts: 2580
6/5/2019
|
Azothi wrote:
For two signs, we have (10 C 2)*(0.05)^2*(0.95)^8 = ~0.0746 probability, or about 7.5%. In other words, one's almost ten times as likely to find two signs compared to confronting rivals. For three signs, we have (10 C 3)*(0.05)^3*(0.95)^7 = ~0.0105 probability, or about 1%. For every confrontation, one is just as likely to find three signs in one expedition.
Note that encountering A Sign twice means that you can complete the expedition in 9 actions instead of 10, which further boosts profitability and reduces the chance of a confrontation (unless that last A Sign is on that tenth action).
After many hundreds of expeditions myself, I've only ever had a confrontation with a rival once, and I've had several runs in which I've has A Sign appear two, or even (rarely) three times.
At the time this was discussed on reddit, I've modified the Java simulation to add the cost of dealing with a confrontation (should it occur) and the effect on the total EPA was completely negligible.
--
 Want a sip of Hesperidean Cider? Send me a request in-game. Here's an_ocelot's guide how.
(Most social actions are welcome. Please no requests to Loiter Suspiciously and no investigations of the Affluent Photographer)
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Tsar Koschei
Posts: 202
2/13/2019
|
elderfleur wrote:
the endgame goal has recently jumped above 210 pence per action
What are considered the best readily repeatable money grinds these days, anyway? Discounting all that business about optimizing your deck and minimizing the amount of discardable cards.
--
https://www.fallenlondon.com/profile/Tsar%20Koschei
Sanguine Ribbon Society tournament champion.
No chess, loitering, friendly sparring, coffee at Caligula's or Affluent Photographer, please.
|
|
|
+1
link
|