UO Second Age

this is not how you mine you set a in game macro last object-last target and set it for the down key ....then u stick a gd penny in the keyboard thats how i do it thats how ive always done it and thats how all should do it.
Im john henry i challenge your mining bots bring em on ill mine there corpses after i mine the cave dry.

TheEttinKing wrote:Im john henry i challenge your mining bots bring em on ill mine there corpses after i mine the cave dry.

ahaha

MatronDeWinter wrote:Here is the macro I use, it takes the monotony out of mining. You have a backpack full of shovels and you use one then select a place to mine and play the macro. You will mine a spot dry and then it will present you with a target to select a new spot. Once your overweight (you set this to your max weight minus 20 or so) it will spam "time to smelt" every 5 seconds until you clear the ore from your bag or smelt it into ingots. Just walk around a click, very simple.

Amazing Macro, thank you so much!

Hey this macro is a lot of help, thank you for providing it.

Sorry all, but I'm new to razor and haven't played UO in a longggg time. Anyway, where do i copypaste these macros? In my razor folder (even though I have macros) there are none listed there.

Found my own answer. Anyone else with the problem with macros check here...

http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=17574

Thanks for the macro Matron, works simply enough and I enjoy it.

Does this still work? I tried creating my own before digging this up, but it seems that Razor ignores the sysmessages about "no metal". Anyone else having this problem?

I was curious about whether using 5x different shovels, or 1x shovel at a time really made a difference. Subjectively, the limiting factor looked like how fast the server would accept commands. I decided to test it more accurately by running a hypothesis test with a randomized block design to test it a bit less subjectively.

The short version is I used statistics to test if the average ore per minute was the same for both methods of mining.

I created a macro that used 5 specified shovels sequentially, and dug at my feet to test the 5x shovel method.
I modified this macro to use any shovel in general, making only that change, to test the 1x shovel method.

Once my macros were created I chose two separate mines and timed how long it took to fully mine them dry. I emptied both mines 5 times with the 5x method, and 5 times with the 1x method. I followed the same route through the mine each time. I recorded the ore mined each pass to compute the ore mined per minute.

I have tried to test this to the best of my knowledge on how these methods work. If there is a gaping flaw in my macros please let me know so I can correct the error and produce better results.

The macros used are as follows:

5x Method 1x Method Withholding the ugly technical babble, the result was that I found insufficient evidence to support the claim that there is a difference in mining speed between 1x shovel or 5x shovels. There does not appear to be any real difference in mining speed. The limiting factor is how quickly you can feed shovel use and target information to the game server without it telling you you're going too fast. This can be controlled by adjusting the pause time between actions.

Strip-charts showing the ore-per-minute and averages for both methods are posted below.





Notice that while there is not significant evidence to say there's a difference on a statistical level, there is a difference between the two methods. Specifically, the 1x shovel method produced better results. So why is this? Why does it appear that 1x shovel is performing more efficiently than 5x?

What we can interpret from the graphs is that the 5x shovel method is slower as a result of the increased complexity of the macros. The time spent re-targeting shovels every time one would break was time not spent mining. On average it would take about 25-30 seconds to re-target the next batch of shovels to be used. In the mines I cleared I would use two sets of shovels with the 5x method, for about 1 minute each pass spent re-targeting, which we see in the differences in the plots.

Occam's Razor essentially states that all other things being equal, simpler soutions are generally better than more complex ones. This is what we're seeing here.

I am not fully satisfied with the variance in my data collection. I'm going to build macros which will further reduce the human-performance element and explore a little further, and also test using a shovel + pick for completeness, but I feel pretty confident now that multiple tools does not provide much gain. Simple is better.

TL;DR - Mining with 1x shovel at a time is more efficient.

- Miner Threat

Amazing. I was just researching this, trying to figure out what makes it faster.

I think you may have made an error in your 5x macro. Remove the pause between shovels, and rely on your action queue, set it as low as you can without the server rejecting an object use.
The reason it's faster is you use the next shovel as soon as it's available. At least, I think that's how it works.

When I've tried it, I seem to mine MUCH faster, at least, visually.

Thanks for the additional info Abbot! Going to play around with it some more and see if I can dig deeper.

decrement wrote:. . . see if I can dig deeper.

chuckled

Just curious if there is any real difference between using a pick axe and a shovel usage/durability wise.

Not sure about durability, but picks weigh much more than shovels.

Old thread but good info. Thanks all that submitted. Miner 49er here I come!