Analysis of Diso and Trading Community Goals from a profit perspective

Greetings Folks!

Introduction
This is a fairly long post about Community Goal profits compared to regular trading, especially with reference to the most recent one at Diso. You may not care about the details, in which case jump to the conclusion at the end. You may not care about maximizing your profits at all, in which case ignore this thread completely. Otherwise, read on. :)

The Data
Here is the important part of my spreadsheet analysis:
EVGbEfL.png

I assumed a 7-minute one-way time (14 round-trip) for the circuit. Note that this isn't just flight time, it's buying the goods at Station A, flying out of mass lock range, hyperjumping to Station B with only 1 hop in between, flying to the station, landing, selling the goods, buying the return goods, flying out of mass lock, returning to the station, and selling the goods... the whole 9 yards. So 7 minutes is pretty generous, it may take many people longer than that. Remember this point because if it takes you even 1 minute longer to do the route, the most profitable Tier (70%, Tier D) drops by 1.5 million profit / hr.

I gathered the REQUIRED TONS (to reach each tier) from the Active Community Goals thread. They are estimates only; if you think you have a better number I will update my sheet accordingly and repost the numbers if they represent a significant change in the resulting analysis.

My cargo space at the time was 528, but the analysis applies to everyone since it's about maximising credits per ton per hour. If you have less cargo space all that means is that it will take longer to reach each tier and your net profits per hour will be lower, but they will still be proportionally the same.

Some people might be confused by the "DIF. INCREASE" (difficulty increase) column. What this means is that (for example) to reach Tier D you had to work 3.03 times harder than you did to get the Tier E (100%) reward. For Tier C, you had to work 2.5 times harder than you did in Tier D, and so on and so forth. As with PAY GAIN, the second column is a comparison to baseline (Tier E, 100%).

What This Means

Looking at the data above, we can see that the resulting profit per hour (including both trade proceeds and final payouts) decreases as you go up in tiers. Here's a pretty graph which shows the same thing:
SBs3j1B.png

What this is suggesting is that on a perfect day, the time you spent reaching Tier A (5%), you would have earned the same overall profit per hour had you just stayed with a decently profitable trading route. In the graph I show a modest 6.5 million credits per hour route as my comparison. For those of you who have 8 million cr/hr routes (I've never found any, but I've seen people claim they have such routes), you are effectively losing money if you even try to get to Tier B (15%) when you add in the adjustments below.

What you must understand is that the profits per hour listed above are for those who hit the exact cutoff only and don't go any over. It would be equivalent to hitting a Tier and immediately stopping — but most people work a little more in the hopes they don't get bumped down a tier. Since working extra to reach a comfortable spot in the middle of a tier does not increase your end payout, you will lose potential profits very quickly if the circuit profit/hr amount for the community goal is low.

Adjustments
To reiterate, the data above shows profit per hour in a perfect world. We don't live in a perfect world last I checked, so this section is where I explain other factors that we must take into account. The biggest of these I already mentioned above: the "overkill factor". Every ton submitted to the community goal which does not directly affect your final standing results in a drop in profits equal to the difference in profit/hour rate of your normal route compared to that of the CG route. In Diso's case, the difference was about 50% (in other words, my regular route was about two times as profitable per hour), which is quite significant. I will use my own case as an example:

Diso was the first Trading CG I participated in where I wanted to see if I could get into the top 5%. I wasn't exactly sure where the cutoff was, even when I reached it around 9000 I wasn't sure where it would be by the end. I ended up submitting 23,760 tons, about 10,000 over the required amount for 5% (silly me). In that extra time I spent (~4.4 hrs), I only earned $14,720,000 from trade profits (with obviously no additional final payout benefit). Under my normal route, I would have made $28,348,274 in that time, so I effectively "lost" $13,628,274 that I could have potentially gained if I stayed on my normal route (3.1 million per hour). For Tier A achievers, we effectively break even with a 6.5 million credits/hr (~12,900 credits/ton/hr) route right as we hit the 5% Tier.

Let's look at other tiers: Since the top 15% (Tier B) resulted in a profit of $8,610,925.71 per hour, that's $2,168,136 more than I would have made on my normal route. When you put these two pieces of information together, it means that if one works just 42 minutes extra to get comfortably over the cutoff point, you will have effectively broke even with the profits you would have made from you previous trading route, and that's not even taking into consideration any of the other factors below.

If your regular route is approximately twice as profitable as the CG route:
For Tier A (5%): You have already starting losing profit per hour if you reach this point.
For Tier B (15%): You break even at 42 minutes.
For Tier C (40%): You break even at 1 hour 55 minutes.
For Tier D (70%): You break even at 2 hours 38 minutes.

Other factors that should be taken into consideration:
- It takes time to travel from our current trade route to the Community Goal station. When we are done putting in our work there, we have to travel back to where we were. Furthermore, when the Community goal ends, we have to travel there to pick up our reward, and then back again. This can take some time if your normal route is far away. If the total time to do those two back and forths takes you 30 minutes and you earn 6.5 million credits per hour with your route, you have to subtract $3,250,000 from whatever profit you earned from the community goal.
- The profit per ton will diminish over time with so many people doing the same routes during a Community Goal. Conversely, with less people doing a normal route (because they are partaking in the CG), the profit per ton at your regular trade route may actually go up.

In Open play, there are further risks introduced:
- Your risk of getting interdicted increases enormously.
- During peak times, landing platforms can become congested, increasing the time it takes to run circuits and decreasing overall profit.

Conclusion
At this time, from a profit standpoint it makes sense to participate in community goals but only until you get comfortably into the top 40% (Tier C) bracket if your regular trading route is significantly more profitable. This is because the gains from the payout do not scale with the required effort to reach the higher tiers. In fact, there is an inverse relationship between the profit you gain per hour and the time spent achieving the goal as soon as you hit the first real tier cutoff (70%). In other words, the more you spend contributing to the goal, the less you earn until eventually you start earning less than you would have if you had stuck to a decently profitable commodity trade route.

Note that this is just based on my analysis of Diso data, but I looked over past Trading CG's and found similar payout scales, most often much lower because the max tiers were not reached in several of them. In fact I believe this is the highest payout we've seen so far for a Trading CG, but I could be wrong about that. So unless the payout is increased for the upper tiers in future CG's or the routes themselves are more profitable, it will remain true that it does not make sense to participate in them beyond the middle tier.

Also note that by me releasing this information, less people will try to reach the top tiers, making their cutoff points relatively easier to reach (thus making them more profitable). We can't fully know how this post will affect CG participation in the long run... (but probably not that much).

Cheers,
stoicfury

P.S. I just lost ~$16,000,000 in the time it took me to write this post. :p But seriously, I do want to remind people this game isn't just about making the most money, it should be about having fun (for a lucky few people, those are one and the same). Indeed, it's fun for me to crunch numbers and expand human knowledge, so I hope you find this useful. It was interesting and fun to find this stuff out. :)
 
Last edited:
I don't think there is anything to fix with regards to CG participation, at least not in this case. The incentives to participate were clearly enough as the CG completed with several days to spare.
 
If you look at past Trading Community Goals, you'll notice that many of them never reached their final tier. Only relatively recently have these CG's been participated in to a great extent, but it could change if people realize they aren't profitable (at least, not past 40%). The vast majority of people that play this game are traders, so I don't think it's a stretch to say that they go where the profits take them.

More importantly (to your point), it says nothing that a particular CG or all CG's were completed with "days to spare". The goals are given fixed timelines; how fast a handful of players complete them does not determine how much participation there was. Perhaps 25% of traders went all-out last weekend and did most of the work. Or 60% of traders worked a medium amount. Or 95% worked a small amount. You can't know that the incentives were clearly enough until you actually know how many people participated...
 
If you look at past Trading Community Goals, you'll notice that many of them never reached their final tier.

Because a lot of them were wastes of time on many levels. They were either underincentivised, placed in out of the way areas, or the goal itself was meaningless to most people.

Discount on the Federal Dropship? I didn't even bother signing up for that one.

Only relatively recently have these CG's been participated in to a great extent, but it could change if people realize they aren't profitable (at least, not past 40%).

I think most people are well aware that the higher tiers are more work per credit than the lower tiers. The diminishing returns should be blatantly obvious. You need on bond, one voucer, one ton of cargo to get into the top 100%, minimal participation to get top 70%, a fair amount of work for 40% and past that is more hassle than it's worth, from a profit stand point, and should be. Most of the people at the top of these goals aren't doing it for the individual rewards; they know more money could be made elsewhere.

You can't know that the incentives were clearly enough until you actually know how many people participated...

The incentive is enough if the goal completes. If the goal fails to be completed (to it's final tier) the incentive was not enough for what was being asked. That's the only metric that should matter to the entities offering these missions.

Patreus now knows that if he wants to rapidly execute a mass reclamation/enslavement from an outpost in a disadvantaged location that he both needs to offer a greater monetary incentive as well as openly guarantee the reward regardless of success. Many people ceased to bother with his side of the Quivira conflict when the independents started to pull a head because they feared they would get no reward from him at all.
 
I played for the community aspect*, any credits made was a bonus...

*The station rammers are not part of the community.
 
Because a lot of them were wastes of time on many levels. They were either underincentivised, placed in out of the way areas, or the goal itself was meaningless to most people.

Discount on the Federal Dropship? I didn't even bother signing up for that one.

The reward for Diso was more corn... I think you'll find it thus difficult to argue that the recent rewards have had better incentives and that's why they had high participation...

The incentive is enough if the goal completes. If the goal fails to be completed (to it's final tier) the incentive was not enough for what was being asked.

You can't actually know that. In other words, what you're saying is true only if Frontier's only (or "primary") goal for CG's to to have them be completed. But I'm sure they care about more than that, i.e. bringing the community together. And by "bringing the community together" they probably hope that more than just a handful of hardcore people will get together to complete the goal really fast. Rather, it's likely that they want as many people as possible to participate, bringing us back to my first reply to you: you can't know how many people actually participated in the event based simply on how fast the event completed.


Patreus now knows that if he wants to rapidly execute a mass reclamation/enslavement from an outpost in a disadvantaged location that he both needs to offer a greater monetary incentive as well as openly guarantee the reward regardless of success. Many people ceased to bother with his side of the Quivira conflict when the independents started to pull a head because they feared they would get no reward from him at all.

You seem to be under the impression most players have any idea of and/or care about the story behind the CG's. I have no statistics on this myself, but I'd be curious to see them (i.e. what % of people do the CG specifically for a goal vs doing it just because it's something new to do; when there are multiple, which do it because of a particular moral ideology vs what % of people just do the one because it's easier (Stapledon Dock was ridiculously far away and required downsizing if you are in a large ship, for example); etc.).
 
Great post. Looking forward similar analysis for future trade CGs as well to see if there is a similar trend (Which I think it will)
 
I did quite well in my Asp. Over a day I got about 100k per trip and just hit the next tier. Woke up to $8m and enough to buy my Python at nearby Zaonce discount with 11m to spare for mostly D class upgrades and full set of usable defenses.

I feel it was far better than I would have gotten otherwise. And 100k is pretty decent in a 80t cargo even if it did taper off. Once Crop Harvesters lost their value Water Purifiers still earnt about 90k with sources very close by at very low prices.

These are the only two CG's I have done so far. It did feel a bit of grind. Should be MUCH easier and more fun in the future with a 208t python that can still bounty hunt :).
 
I did quite well in my Asp. Over a day I got about 100k per trip and just hit the next tier. Woke up to $8m and enough to buy my Python at nearby Zaonce discount with 11m to spare for mostly D class upgrades and full set of usable defenses.

I feel it was far better than I would have gotten otherwise. And 100k is pretty decent in a 80t cargo even if it did taper off. Once Crop Harvesters lost their value Water Purifiers still earnt about 90k with sources very close by at very low prices.

These are the only two CG's I have done so far. It did feel a bit of grind. Should be MUCH easier and more fun in the future with a 208t python that can still bounty hunt :).

Congrats on your python -- it's my favorite ship and I'm sure you'll have a blast with it too. :)
 
I played for the community aspect*, any credits made was a bonus...

*The station rammers are not part of the community.

Same.
I don't really do trading, but I don't mind trying to get through the players in a community goal.
 
While the numbers may be irrelevant (since every trading CG has been completely different), the point is correct: Chasing top 5% may give you the most money, but you get a much lower profit per hour.

Crossposting my own numbers for Diso here:

Math time again!

Profit from trading: 4,826,456
Tons traded: 7,684

cr/t single trip = 628

top 40% reached, bonus pay 8 million credits

12,826,456 credits earned
divided by 7,684
1,669 crt on the single trip, or 3,338 round trip on a route that was single jump 30 and 280 LS from the star.

Yeah, trading CGs totally worthless and waste of time.

By only doing 8 trips to Diso, I kept my time investment into this CG very low. Yet the return I received was considerable, it turned out to be much, much better than regular trading would have been.

However, when the trading involving the CG is more profitable, the numbers change dramatically. Lugh CG I made 1500 cr on the way in and 300 on the way out. With 1800 cr/t round trip I was not falling behind as much as at Diso, where 1300 cr/t round trip was about what you could get due to Shifnalports abysmal economy. Federation players in Khaka could actually make 2k round trip due to the insane seed of 8050 cr for battle weapons.

On the other hand, when you get to carry Copper, because the Federation is a giant scam and cheats all the honest, hard working middle class traders out of their time, and make just 500 cr/t round trip (or whatever bd+03 2338 could get you), you'll find it hard to reach a point where the whole thing was anywhere near regular trading.


in short: Your graphs are nice, but they only apply to a CG already over.
 
in short: Your graphs are nice, but they only apply to a CG already over.

Not only do the graphs only apply to a CG now over (Diso), they apply only to a specific circuit for that CG. The unfortunate thing about data analysis is that you usually have to wait til the experiment is over before you can start analyzing. :(

Nevertheless, my conclusions apply to all CG's. The numbers will change as route profits vary and payouts change, but this gives people a good starting place to estimate profits when they do.
 
How do you factor in the corn reward?

if you complete the goal and then trade Diso Ma Corn to at least 120ly away the profit per ton is about £3.5k - should this not be factored in too?

I suppose as everyone get this reward it would be beneficial to contribute only to a "sweet spot" of profit vs time - could you work out what that would be?

Finally, is there any way this analysis could be done beforehand? The tier levels are hidden so there's no way in advance to work out the sweet spot, is there?

Great analysis!
 
The reward for Diso was more corn... I think you'll find it thus difficult to argue that the recent rewards have had better incentives and that's why they had high participation...

A guaranteed 50 tons of Diso Ma Corn from one stop is a pretty good reward.

Even if you aren't buying the corn yourself it means more traders, thus more pirates, and thus more counter-pirates. In short, more fun for everyone.


You can't actually know that. In other words, what you're saying is true only if Frontier's only (or "primary") goal for CG's to to have them be completed. But I'm sure they care about more than that, i.e. bringing the community together. And by "bringing the community together" they probably hope that more than just a handful of hardcore people will get together to complete the goal really fast. Rather, it's likely that they want as many people as possible to participate, bringing us back to my first reply to you: you can't know how many people actually participated in the event based simply on how fast the event completed.

The absolute number of participants is irrelevant. "Enough" is the self evident answer to how many participated on a CG that completed all tiers.

You seem to be under the impression most players have any idea of and/or care about the story behind the CG's.

No, I'm under the impression that more than pure monetary profit is important, no matter how many people care or don't care.

People being indifferent to the sociopolitical or historical aspects of the CGs is, in my opinion, not any excuse what so ever to make the CG's worth while from a pure credit standpoint. Of course, in game, the factions behind these CG's should be offering incentives in accordance with their needs and abilities, which may need to take the public appeal, or lack thereof, of these aspects into account.

Stapledon Dock was ridiculously far away and required downsizing if you are in a large ship, for example); etc.).

30k light-seconds was only ridiculously far away for ridiculously lazy people.

It was barely an inconvenience for me to fly those 30k ls and gun down scads of Imperial CMDRs who were woefully unprepared to face me. It seemed as if many of them felt four minutes of SC was an impossible hurdle.

I secured 40% on both of the Quivira CGs, and probably caused triple my net worth in CMDR rebuys in the process. It was an awesome event.
 
Last edited:
Irrelevant, because you can pick up the corn now regardless of whether you participated in the goal or not.

The goal still needed to be completed to maximum tier for anyone to see maximum benefit.

I moved 3,300 tons to secure 40% (I didn't know exactly what was required, but deducing from the number of participants at the time and the pattern I had seen with other CGs, ~3k seemed like a safe place to stop), and would have moved more if I thought the CG was going to risk falling short (but not by so much that my contribution could not possibly have mattered).
 
I only traded 720t of Water Purifiers and got into the 70% (In fact I entered 70% after 500t on the last day of trading). My trip was Zaonce to Diso making about 1200cr/t profit on that trip and trading Algae back for around 150cr/t.

It took me exactly 6 trips to make this amount and I would guess roughly an hour to do so in an ASP with 120t cargo space.

All in all a lucrative 4million credit bonus on top of 980,000 trading credit :)
 
The reward of 50 tons of corn is a good incentive to players at the Asp/T6 level but to be honest it didn't factor in my decision to take part in my Anaconda. The profits on 50 tons of corn after taking it 170ly is around 800,000 credits which I can do in a 12 minute round trip in my Anaconda on my normal trade run.
I bought 50 tons when the goal ended just because I could but couldn't be bothered to go all that way to maximise the profits on it so I sold it for a few thousand credits per ton at my base of operations about 60ly away.

The ship discount at Zaonce on the other hand was a major incentive. I made about 30 million in savings using that by selling and rebuying my Python and also getting the Anaconda at a whopping discount.
 
<Smart stuff>

Rep for that - nice post.

I think some people in this thread seem to be getting terribly caught up in thinking your post was indended to be a "how to" which is meaningless as the CG has finished.

What I think it is - if I'm understanding you correctly - is an astute observation based on evidence collected from the most recent trade CG that people shouldn't necessarily rush headlong into a CG thinking it's going to make them more money. It might, but it will depend on the opportunity cost of their time.


You make this very point in your final para: it's not necessarily about making money, it's about having fun. Interestingly, the early CGs were a massive draw for me because they were something different. By that stage, I'd got a bit bored with trade grinding so wasn't playing as much. When the CG came along, I played a lot more because it was interesting. So, whilst the per hour return might have been lower than trade grinding, I wouldn't have played as many hours doing the trade grind as I did in the CG. Moreover, it was fun.

So if we tl;dr your post, it's basically "Trade CGs look to be great returners for the lower bands, especially for people with smaller capacity ships who can't haul 400+ tonnes each way. For these people, the 40% band might well be the target anyway and that just happens to coincide with the more profitable end of the CG."

It also encourages large capacity haulers to drop in more for the final blast, when the total rewards are known and a logical assessment as to return can be made. 8-10 return trips to drop 4000 tonnes can be done in probably a hour or so - well worth it for a 10mn credit return.

In terms of achieving the goal / securing the high tiers, it's worth noting that for Diso the top 5% probably delivered about 25% of the total goal. Clearly, we don't want to be disincentivising these participants otherwise we'll struggle more to secure the top tiers in CGs. Conversely, we had plenty of time still left, so maybe we could have...

Still, a very informative post analysing this last CG - good stuff.
 
V nice analysis, OP :) . I got in the top 40% and thought that the reward was appropriate for my efforts. I hope that the developers look at your analysis and improve the rewards for the higher tiers as well in future community goals.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom