WOK 5 mining

Bjorn · Post by **Bjorn** » Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:27 pm

Vampires?
Al's cookie jar?
Let's talk about WOK 5!

In my last couple of games I have been playing with the magic aspect of WOK5. Egbert's amazing island game is a good place to do this because there are a very limited number of conections to each space.

I have collected my mining results over several turns from multiple games into an excell spreadsheet to track it. I have noticed that I ALWAYS have more success mining that I expect. I tried to paste this file in the messge, but HTML is OFF so it won't work. Let's see if I can link to it here from my web site.

http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/gmtom/WOK_Mining.htm

I calculate the expected number of successful mining efforts based on number of workers x 1.5 (because I only mine in mountains) x success rate. Then I add up all the stuff I actually did mine and compare it to this result. I always get more stuff than I expected. At the bottom of each column are the percentages of each item gained based on a successful mining effort. I had to keep the city and non-city spaces separate to make the calculation meaningful.

Has anyone else noted this? Does anyone really care?

Post by **gm_al** » Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:55 pm

That is very interesting !

I cant say if you collected enough data to already say that there is a 'trend' so that mining actually pays off better then expected, but Ill keep watching this thread closely.

And get ya hands off my cookie jar.

Funtastick · Post by **Funtastick** » Sat Oct 18, 2003 8:13 pm

You know you have no life when...

You know you're addicted to WOK when...

C'mon, someone had to say it!

Bjorn · Post by **Bjorn** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 4:15 am

Funtastick wrote:You know you have no life when...
You know you're addicted to WOK when...
C'mon, someone had to say it!

This? Chump change! You should see the files I have on this computer related to being the gatekeeper........well, maybe not.

I have updated the mining spreadsheet with more information from Egbert 04. It looks like a multiplier of 2 produces a result much closer to the actual result than the stated multiplier of 1.5 in the mountains.