Meticulous Disassembly still broken in 6.3.4 for JC? (other craft not tested)

Mix · February 2021

Once again this star should have been fixed and once again it seems to be having issues.

I chose to refine 100k of Jewelry Dust per test (20k each of pewter, copper, silver, electrum, platinum dusts) as this is a LOT of mats for me on Live and if no substantial increase in temper grains is noticeable the star is not worth 50 CP to me.

For the first three rows I tested both investment and slotting of the star just in case something was bugging out there, but it doesn't seem to be. at 3/3 Jewelry Extraction there appears to be no consistent increase in obtained grains. (more on this later during the Extraction investment tests)

For the last two rows I tested whether Engraver would have any change on the functionality of the star and it also was not consistent.

The first four rows illustrate what is refined without the star and with 0-3/3 Jewelry Extraction. At each level it becomes possible to obtain the next quality grain from refining. The amount of the grains, looking at Terne ranges from 1219 to 1533 which seems a bit strange to me but I could guess that the statistics of these drop chances maybe aren't well represented with a sample of 100k raw dust.

The next eight rows look at the effect of investment and slotting of the Meticulous Disassembly star at least level of Jewelry Extraction investment.

For Jewelry Extraction 0/3, 1/3 and 2/3 the star seems to function the same as adding a skill point to Jewelry Extraction (previously observed by other testers in previous pts builds)

However, when I look at the combination of 3/3 Jewelry Extraction AND Meticulous Disassembly star slotted (which will likely be the most common configuration for a master crafter) the effect of the star is not especially obvious. More Terne was obtained, Iridium and Zircon appeared to be about the same amount without the star and more Chromium grains were obtained. The lack of a consistent increase in ALL grain types is confusing to me though and leads me to believe the star is still not working as intended.

Maybe it IS related to the sample size of the 100k raw dust refined not being enough to obtain a good average and eliminate the randomness. I am not that great with statistics, but 100k felt like a reasonable sample for an average player crafter who doesn't farm nodes excessively but does do plenty of surveys which is based completely on my own experience and not very scientific lol.

I would test other crafts if we had a source of the raw mats in the pts test boxes, but right now we only have jewelry dust obtainable this way.

I guess I could do more 100k tests for the 3/3 Jewelry Extraction with and without Met-Dis slotted to see if the numbers start to form a more obvious trend with more data, but for now I am really tired of opening the Jewelry Dust Shipment box

lillybit · February 2021

Thank you, that's awesome! How it is now it looks like if there's any difference at all it's not worth the cost of 100cp

remosito · February 2021

still not working....that's crazy...

MashmalloMan · February 2021

Just wanted to say thank you for your in depth testing.. it seems rare nowadays to see actual detailed posts for the "Public Test Server" where people should actually test things. It's a lot easier to shout opinions about things you don't agree with than come up with actual evidence to support your claims.

These posts are what ZOS are looking for. So thank you for helping to make the game better!

virtus753 · February 2021

lillybit wrote: »

Thank you, that's awesome! How it is now it looks like if there's any difference at all it's not worth the cost of 100cp

It's only 50 now, but still -- that saves us 50 CP until they can get their act together.

Thanks so much for taking the time to test, Mix!

ETA: That second row in the first table really stands out to me. It's over +10% on chromium grains, but why would we ever slot the node if investing in it but not slotting it can give better results?

redlink1979 · February 2021

@Mix Thanks for your efforts.

tmbrinks · February 2021

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

EDIT: Did some additional testing with another 100k mats of each of the 5 types. The results were statistically significant at +10% to drop rates, so my new guess is that it's +12.5%, as this seems to split the difference between the 4 improvement materials recieved.

virtus753 · February 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

Since you understand the stats here: how can we explain the last two rows in the first table in the OP? Three out of four types of grains were higher in the second row (invested but not slotted) than the third (invested and slotted).

Is the variation so high within the results of 100k mats that we can be better off without the node than with it?

Or would you say this node is actually being treated as a passive somehow, where just investing in it is enough to get the bonus?

I am looking at the spreadsheet you linked (thank you for the work!), but I can't tell if you tested this uninvested, invested but not slotted, and then slotted, or whether it was just uninvested vs. slotted.

tmbrinks · February 2021

virtus753 wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

Since you understand the stats here: how can we explain the last two rows in the first table in the OP? Three out of four types of grains were higher in the second row (invested but not slotted) than the third (invested and slotted).

Is the variation so high within the results of 100k mats that we can be better off without the node than with it?

Or would you say this node is actually being treated as a passive somehow, where just investing in it is enough to get the bonus?

I am looking at the spreadsheet you linked (thank you for the work!), but I can't tell if you tested this uninvested, invested but not slotted, and then slotted, or whether it was just uninvested vs. slotted.

I only did it with it slotted, have not tried with the points in and not slotted

virtus753 · February 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

Since you understand the stats here: how can we explain the last two rows in the first table in the OP? Three out of four types of grains were higher in the second row (invested but not slotted) than the third (invested and slotted).

Is the variation so high within the results of 100k mats that we can be better off without the node than with it?

Or would you say this node is actually being treated as a passive somehow, where just investing in it is enough to get the bonus?

I am looking at the spreadsheet you linked (thank you for the work!), but I can't tell if you tested this uninvested, invested but not slotted, and then slotted, or whether it was just uninvested vs. slotted.

I only did it with it slotted, have not tried with the points in and not slotted

Ok, thank you for the quick reply!

tmbrinks · February 2021

virtus753 wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

Since you understand the stats here: how can we explain the last two rows in the first table in the OP? Three out of four types of grains were higher in the second row (invested but not slotted) than the third (invested and slotted).

Is the variation so high within the results of 100k mats that we can be better off without the node than with it?

Or would you say this node is actually being treated as a passive somehow, where just investing in it is enough to get the bonus?

I am looking at the spreadsheet you linked (thank you for the work!), but I can't tell if you tested this uninvested, invested but not slotted, and then slotted, or whether it was just uninvested vs. slotted.

I only did it with it slotted, have not tried with the points in and not slotted

Ok, thank you for the quick reply!

Just added in a spot where I did it with the points in and did NOT slot the star.

Drop rates were within the expected range of the original values.

virtus753 · February 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

Since you understand the stats here: how can we explain the last two rows in the first table in the OP? Three out of four types of grains were higher in the second row (invested but not slotted) than the third (invested and slotted).

Is the variation so high within the results of 100k mats that we can be better off without the node than with it?

Or would you say this node is actually being treated as a passive somehow, where just investing in it is enough to get the bonus?

I am looking at the spreadsheet you linked (thank you for the work!), but I can't tell if you tested this uninvested, invested but not slotted, and then slotted, or whether it was just uninvested vs. slotted.

I only did it with it slotted, have not tried with the points in and not slotted

Ok, thank you for the quick reply!

Just added in a spot where I did it with the points in and did NOT slot the star.

Drop rates were within the expected range of the original values.

I see it now! Thanks so much for checking. I am still befuddled by that initial test above, but I see your numbers.

Thank you!!

remosito · February 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

10% is lrss than hoped for indeed.

Can you do a binomial distribution analysis on it not being 20%?

if 10% we'd have 1.1->1.5 on plentiharvest and 1.1 from this. For a 50% increase of temper influx into the market. Assuming no increased farming.

Will be interesting to see how +50% will impact temper prices..

Mix · February 2021

very nice @tmbrinks

Definitely better with the stats than I am!

Is the "expected" drop rate what we would expect to see without the star?

tmbrinks · February 2021

remosito wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

10% is lrss than hoped for indeed.

Can you do a binomial distribution analysis on it not being 20%?

if 10% we'd have 1.1->1.5 on plentiharvest and 1.1 from this. For a 50% increase of temper influx into the market. Assuming no increased farming.

Will be interesting to see how +50% will impact temper prices..

Done, very clearly NOT +20%

tmbrinks · February 2021

Mix wrote: »

very nice @tmbrinks

Definitely better with the stats than I am!

Is the "expected" drop rate what we would expect to see without the star?

Yes, that is the drop rate experienced from the 2 million plus mats I've refined over the past 2+ years

remosito · February 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

remosito wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

10% is lrss than hoped for indeed.

Can you do a binomial distribution analysis on it not being 20%?

if 10% we'd have 1.1->1.5 on plentiharvest and 1.1 from this. For a 50% increase of temper influx into the market. Assuming no increased farming.

Will be interesting to see how +50% will impact temper prices..

Done, very clearly NOT +20%

thank you!

I guess they can always buff it in a future patch if temper prices are bot sufficiently affected.

tmbrinks · February 2021

Edit my original post above... but upon further testing, I think it's closer to a 12.5% increase (1/8th)

Mix · February 2021

I totally should have finished reading your post before jumping into the spreadsheet because you did say that, sorry!

virtus753 · February 2021

remosito wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

remosito wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

10% is lrss than hoped for indeed.

Can you do a binomial distribution analysis on it not being 20%?

if 10% we'd have 1.1->1.5 on plentiharvest and 1.1 from this. For a 50% increase of temper influx into the market. Assuming no increased farming.

Will be interesting to see how +50% will impact temper prices..

Done, very clearly NOT +20%

thank you!

I guess they can always buff it in a future patch if temper prices are bot sufficiently affected.

I do have to be skeptical whether the devs try to micromanage drop rates to influence prices on the various servers. Prices are already so disparate depending on server (not just platform) that it would seem futile. And the fairly sizeable increase to prices within an individual megaserver (I can only speak for PC-NA), as well as the steady observed drop rate of gold mats over the years, suggests that the devs don't necessarily interfere with drop rates in an attempt to impact the market.

FrancisCrawford · February 2021

+10% improvement to something economically valuable seems pretty fair for a slottable CP star.

xericdx · February 2021

Just want to thank all for the tests, much appreciated to get a clear answer (and happy to hear that it is indeed fixed).

cheers,

remosito · February 2021

virtus753 wrote: »

remosito wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

remosito wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

I don't think it's broken. I think it provides an additional +10% resources above what we would get at 3/3 in the deconstruction passives.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/153tkynjLNvEY85RbQq2X1DAFeuE2MPL2iTTdjpdnuiY/edit?usp=sharing

data here.

I did some testing with 0/3, 1/3, 2/3 + Meticulous and it seems to "add one level" to the process.

When going to 3/3 + Meticulous there was a statistically larger... enough so that doing a binomial distribution analysis of it says that there is a 100% chance that the "normal" drop rate of 1.5% for green, 1.25% for blue, 0.75% for purple, and 0.5% for gold is NOT correct and that it is a higher value than that.

If they added +10% to the expected drop rates this would give 1.65% for green, 1.375 for blue, 0.825% for purple and 0.55% for gold, which is much closer to the observed values from this test of 300k materials that are jewelry.

DEFINITELY worth the passive star on your refining character that refines materials. Perhaps not by as much as we were hoping for, but it is still an improvement.

10% is lrss than hoped for indeed.

Can you do a binomial distribution analysis on it not being 20%?

if 10% we'd have 1.1->1.5 on plentiharvest and 1.1 from this. For a 50% increase of temper influx into the market. Assuming no increased farming.

Will be interesting to see how +50% will impact temper prices..

Done, very clearly NOT +20%

thank you!

I guess they can always buff it in a future patch if temper prices are bot sufficiently affected.

I do have to be skeptical whether the devs try to micromanage drop rates to influence prices on the various servers. Prices are already so disparate depending on server (not just platform) that it would seem futile. And the fairly sizeable increase to prices within an individual megaserver (I can only speak for PC-NA), as well as the steady observed drop rate of gold mats over the years, suggests that the devs don't necessarily interfere with drop rates in an attempt to impact the market.

PC-EU chromiums have gone from 70k to 140k in the last year.

So at least platform wide.

Dunno about consoles.

marshill88 · April 2021

Met Dis is not working well on me. Slotted, I get the same amount of iridium grains on blue rings as I did before it was slotted. I can't see a difference at all, though I have not done a thorough analysis.

stefj68 · April 2021

marshill88 wrote: »

Met Dis is not working well on me. Slotted, I get the same amount of iridium grains on blue rings as I did before it was slotted. I can't see a difference at all, though I have not done a thorough analysis.

i have the same feelings for a long time

virtus753 · April 2021

marshill88 wrote: »

Met Dis is not working well on me. Slotted, I get the same amount of iridium grains on blue rings as I did before it was slotted. I can't see a difference at all, though I have not done a thorough analysis.

When you say "the same amount," what is your sample size? For a 10-12% increase on an already small chance (if deconning is like the refining results with MD), you will need a thorough analysis to get results that are significant (i.e. beyond the variation of RNG). It isn't something that will be noticeable as you're deconning or refining, since decon is limited to your inventory and bank size and refining is limited to 10k at a time, but the refining part has already been proven on both PTS and live using hundreds of thousands of raw mats.

I haven't seen sample sizes that big for deconning, but you would need something along those lines to show whether MD is actually working for decon like it does for refining. It should, but it would take a large sample size to prove it either way.

marshill88 · April 2021

virtus753 wrote: »

marshill88 wrote: »

Met Dis is not working well on me. Slotted, I get the same amount of iridium grains on blue rings as I did before it was slotted. I can't see a difference at all, though I have not done a thorough analysis.

When you say "the same amount," what is your sample size? For a 10-12% increase on an already small chance (if deconning is like the refining results with MD), you will need a thorough analysis to get results that are significant (i.e. beyond the variation of RNG). It isn't something that will be noticeable as you're deconning or refining, since decon is limited to your inventory and bank size and refining is limited to 10k at a time, but the refining part has already been proven on both PTS and live using hundreds of thousands of raw mats.

I haven't seen sample sizes that big for deconning, but you would need something along those lines to show whether MD is actually working for decon like it does for refining. It should, but it would take a large sample size to prove it either way.

I'm going to now document every ring I disassemble from here on out, and when I have a large sample size, I will be back, but my impressions are it is barely anything. Even if it actually does have a slight benefit, "meticulous" is a word that should not be used by ESO for something so unreliable. It should be renamed "haphazard disassembly"

remosito · April 2021

marshill88 wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

marshill88 wrote: »

Met Dis is not working well on me. Slotted, I get the same amount of iridium grains on blue rings as I did before it was slotted. I can't see a difference at all, though I have not done a thorough analysis.

When you say "the same amount," what is your sample size? For a 10-12% increase on an already small chance (if deconning is like the refining results with MD), you will need a thorough analysis to get results that are significant (i.e. beyond the variation of RNG). It isn't something that will be noticeable as you're deconning or refining, since decon is limited to your inventory and bank size and refining is limited to 10k at a time, but the refining part has already been proven on both PTS and live using hundreds of thousands of raw mats.

I haven't seen sample sizes that big for deconning, but you would need something along those lines to show whether MD is actually working for decon like it does for refining. It should, but it would take a large sample size to prove it either way.

I'm going to now document every ring I disassemble from here on out, and when I have a large sample size, I will be back, but my impressions are it is barely anything. Even if it actually does have a slight benefit, "meticulous" is a word that should not be used by ESO for something so unreliable. It should be renamed "haphazard disassembly"

Tests on last PTS with refinement pointed towards a 12.5% improvement. (mulitpicative, not additive)

So with 3/3 in JC for blue from refining it is 12.5 blue tempers for 1000 mats. With meticulous disasembly it would become 14.1 blue tempers.

Now if decon is similar. RNG luck/badluck will make a much bigger difference than that pitiful increase until you hit A LOT of rings deconned. think 1000s, not 100s....might even be tens of thousands...

@tmbrinks can probably tell you how many rings you need to decon before you have reached statistical significance....

Nestor · April 2021

remosito wrote: »

PC-EU chromiums have gone from 70k to 140k in the last year.

So at least platform wide.

Dunno about consoles.

That is related to being able to make Mythic and Set Item Jewelry now after we collect the mythic or the set. People are simply making more jewelry than they were before.

virtus753 · April 2021

marshill88 wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

marshill88 wrote: »

Met Dis is not working well on me. Slotted, I get the same amount of iridium grains on blue rings as I did before it was slotted. I can't see a difference at all, though I have not done a thorough analysis.

When you say "the same amount," what is your sample size? For a 10-12% increase on an already small chance (if deconning is like the refining results with MD), you will need a thorough analysis to get results that are significant (i.e. beyond the variation of RNG). It isn't something that will be noticeable as you're deconning or refining, since decon is limited to your inventory and bank size and refining is limited to 10k at a time, but the refining part has already been proven on both PTS and live using hundreds of thousands of raw mats.

I haven't seen sample sizes that big for deconning, but you would need something along those lines to show whether MD is actually working for decon like it does for refining. It should, but it would take a large sample size to prove it either way.

I'm going to now document every ring I disassemble from here on out, and when I have a large sample size, I will be back, but my impressions are it is barely anything. Even if it actually does have a slight benefit, "meticulous" is a word that should not be used by ESO for something so unreliable. It should be renamed "haphazard disassembly"

ZOS has a long and venerable history of liberalities, shall we say, in the realm of language. This would be just another example, I'm afraid.

I am very curious as to what you find, since I'm not aware of anyone else keeping track of decon results. This would really help to flesh out the picture of whether deconning and refining are on par or not.

FrancisCrawford · April 2021

Nestor wrote: »

remosito wrote: »

PC-EU chromiums have gone from 70k to 140k in the last year.

So at least platform wide.

Dunno about consoles.

That is related to being able to make Mythic and Set Item Jewelry now after we collect the mythic or the set. People are simply making more jewelry than they were before.

Upgrade mats aren't needed for mythic items.