Sign in to follow this  
Muse

Archaeology - how to find fat caches!

Recommended Posts

Wurmpedia states in https://www.wurmpedia.com/index.php/Archaeology_journal:

 

"The amount of fragments a player may find is determined by their archaeology skill and the report's quality with a minimum of 10 fragments."

"Report quality dictates statue fragment count and the quality levels and numbers of the items found within the cache."

 

Whilst I believe this is correct, I also believe there are even more factors at play, some of which may affect the TOTAL number of (any type of) fragments found.  

 

Today I uncovered some caches from fully complete reports of varying qualities.

 

All of the following caches were uncovered on the same day using the same toon, from reports investigated by the same toon:

 

QL of Report Total # Fragments Token in cache Abandoned In Occupied For Name of Deed
65ql 12 82ql copper 70 years, 5 months, somewhere around the year 1029 3 months Dark Wood
75ql 12 87ql seryll 56 years, 10 months, somewhere around the year 1043 2 months Corley
60ql 14 80ql brass 76 years, 2 months, somewhere around the year 1023 7 months Siren's Call
79ql 14 89ql iron 18 years, 1 month, somewhere around the year 1081 24 years, 9 months South Plains Farm
80ql 16 90ql electrum 72 years, 11 months, somewhere around the year 1027 8 months Step By Steppe
85ql 16 92ql brass 63 years, 11 months, somewhere around the year 1036 6 years, 3 months

Point Lecter

 

I have sorted these records by the TOTAL number of fragments found in each cache. 

 

If the total number of fragments in the cache was solely dependent on the skill of the player and the QL of the reports, we would expect to see a direct co-relation between the QL of the report and #Fragments columns.

 

This is just a small sample, but whilst there could be a slight relationship, it is not conclusive.  There does however appear to be a direct relationship between the report QL and the QL of the mini token produced.

 

We definitely need more samples, so I will try to keep records of future caches.  An interesting study would be to identify the contents of the caches and compare the results including and excluding statue fragments but this falls outside the scope of this small experiment! :)

 

The results do not necessarily mean that Wurmpedia is incorrect in stating there is a relationship between report QL and numbers of items in cache, but rather that there may be more complex factors involved.

 

More Data (27 Feb 2021):

Spoiler

Data from 27th February 2021, using the same toon as the original data for investigating and uncovering the caches:

QL of Report Total # Fragments Token in cache Abandoned In Occupied For Name of Deed
62.75ql 14 (Ave 65.96ql) 8x statue 4x armour 2x weapon 81.37ql copper 64 years, somewhere around the year 1035 6 years, 3 months Point Lecter
66.56ql  14 (Ave 59.13ql) 8x statue 3x armour 2x metal 1x weapon 83.28ql copper 75 years, 5 months, somewhere around the year 1024 1 year, 4 months Hidden Glade
66.63ql  10 (Ave 58.04ql) 6x statue 4x armour 83.32ql bronze 42 years, 11 months, somewhere around the year 1057 9 months Temporary Deed
81.16ql 12 (Ave 72.42ql) 6x statue 4x armour 2x weapon 90.58ql copper 56 years, 11 months, somewhere around the year 1043 2 months Corley
82.41ql 14 (Ave 70.16ql) 7x statue 6x armour 1x metal 91.20ql iron 18 years, 2 months, somewhere around the year 1081 24 years, 9 months South Plains Farm

 

From this small sample of data it is possible to note the following:

 

There continues to be a clear relationship between report QL and QL of mini token produced, this formula appears to be: Token QL = (Report QL / 2) + 50ql

The total number of fragments in the cache are apparently not determined by Report QL and Skill alone  (compare 2 very similar QL reports Hidden Glade 66.56ql and Temporary Deed 66.63ql with 14 fragments and 10 fragments respectively.)

The number of statue fragments are apparently not determined by Report QL and Skill alone (compare 2 reports with very different qualities - Temporary Deed 66.63ql and Corley 81.16ql  - with 10 and 12 total fragments respectively, yet both having 6x statue fragments.)

 

Comparing the two reports with very similar QL - Hidden Glade and Temporary Deed - does seem to point towards some combination of Abandoned Age and/or Period of Occupation being a factor in deciding how many total fragments will be in a cache. This concurs with findings in other caches and mentioned by other archaeologists ( @VelvetSun@Davih) who have found up to 20 fragments on very old deeds on older servers. (The most I have personally found on Deliverance is 18.) See also posts by Davih below.

The number of fragments in a cache appears to be always an even number - something with which many archaeologists will probably be familiar.

 

It appears that the average QL of the fragments in the cache might not be determined by Report QL and skill alone, and there seems to be some Random element, so a larger sample would be useful to see more detail.

It appears that the types of the fragments in the cache are not determined by Report QL and skill alone, and there also seems to be some Random element.  It is also possible that the types of fragments could be affected by Abandoned Age and/or Period of Occupation, so again a larger sample would be useful to see more detail.

More Data (02 April 2021):

Spoiler

Data from 02nd April 2021, using the same toon as the original data for investigating and uncovering the caches:

QL of Report Total # Fragments Token in cache Abandoned In Occupied For Name of Deed
60.85ql 14  8x statue 5x armour 1x weapon 80.42ql iron 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
61.27ql  14  8x statue 4x armour 2x weapon 50.63ql iron 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
62.22ql  14  7x statue 6x armour 1x weapon 81.11ql steel 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
66.41ql 14  7x statue 6x armour 1x weapon 83.20ql lead 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
76.38.ql 16  9x statue 2x armour 2x weapon 3x metal 88.19ql iron 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
78.82.ql 16  8x statue 6x armour 1x weapon 1x metal 89.41ql iron 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
81.47.ql 16  8x statue 7x armour 1x weapon 90.73ql iron 44 years, 8 months, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch

 

This data was collected from 7 caches from the same deed, on the same day.

 

The data shows the affect of Report QL on total number of fragments found, when other data (such as length of habitation, and date of abandonment) are kept constant.

The data also shows the clear bias in favour of statue fragments above other fragment types.

The data is interesting in showing an apparent random effect on the fragment types found. The 5th entry in particular might initially appear to us as though some armour fragments are being randomly re-assigned as other types, however this data could be merely a product of random distribution, and so far more data would be required before making this assumption.

More Data (19 April 2021):

Spoiler

Data from 19th April 2021, using the same toon as the original data for investigating and uncovering the caches:

QL of Report Total # Fragments Token in cache Abandoned In Occupied For Name of Deed
73.68ql 12 7x statue 3x armour 1x weapon 1x metal 86.84ql iron 58 years, somewhere around the year 1042 2 months Corley
73.68ql 12 6x statue 5x armour 1x weapon  86.84ql bronze 58 years, somewhere around the year 1042 2 months Corley
73.68ql 12 7x statue 2x armour 1x weapon 2x metal 86.84ql glimmersteel 58 years, somewhere around the year 1042 2 months Corley
73.68ql 14 7x statue 3x armour 2x weapon 2x tool 86.84ql iron 62 years, 2 months, somewhere around the year 1038 11 months Silverfell
73.68ql 14 8x statue 4x armour 2x weapon  86.84ql adamantine 62 years, 2 months, somewhere around the year 1038 11 months Silverfell
73.68ql 14 9x statue 3x armour 2x weapon 86.84ql iron 19 years, 3 months, somewhere around the year 1081 24 years, 9 months South Plains Farm
73.68ql 14 7x statue 6x armour 1x weapon 86.84ql copper 19 years, 3 months, somewhere around the year 1081 24 years, 9 months South Plains Farm
73.68ql 16 9x statue 2x armour 2x weapon 2x metal 1x tool 86.84ql adamantine 65 years, 1 month, somewhere around the year 1035 6 years, 3 months Point Lecter
73.68ql 16 9x statue 4x armour 2x weapon 1x metal  86.84ql tin 45 years, 1 month, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch
73.68ql 16 8x statue 6x armour 2x weapon  86.84ql copper 45 years, 1 month, somewhere around the year 1055 20 years, 2 months Southport Ranch

 

This data was collected from 10 caches from different deeds on the same day.

 

The data shows the affect of date of abandonment and length of habitation on total number of fragments found when the Report QL is kept constant.

As expected the tokens found are of constant QL.  It also appears to show that the token metal type is determined by factor or factors other than Report QL.

From the adamantine tokens found at Silverfell and Point Lector, we see that token metal type alone does not seem to be linked to the total fragments found in the cache (14 and 16 fragments respectively).

From the iron tokens found at Silverfell and South Plains Farm, it appears that for caches containing the same total fragments, token metal type does not seem to be linked to the numbers of each type of fragment found.

 

With all other known factors held constant or ruled out, the remaining data points to a combination of date of abandonment and length of habitation being factors in determining the total number of fragments in the cache.

 

By comparing the deeds South Plains Farm and Southport Ranch we can see that Length of Habitation alone is not sufficient to determine the total number of fragments found. South Plains Farm has only 14 fragments per cache despite having been occupied for over 4 years longer than Southport Ranch which has 16 per cache.  Therefore we can confirm (given that there are no unknown factors) that Date of Abandonment is definitely a deciding factor in determining the total number of fragments in the cache.

By comparing the deeds Silverfell and Southport Ranch we can see that Date of Abandonment alone is also not sufficient to determine the total number of fragments found.  Southport Ranch has 16 fragments per cache to Silverfell's 14 fragments despite being abandoned nearly 17 years later. Therefore we can confirm (given that there are no unknown factors) that Length of Habitation remains a definite deciding factor in determining the total number of fragments in the cache.

By comparing the deeds Corley, Silverfell and South Plains Farm we see that Corley founded 58 years, 2 months ago (Date of Abandonment + Length of Habitation) receives only 12 fragments whereas South Plains Farm founded 44 years ago receives 14 fragments.  South Plains Farm founded over 63 years ago also receives 14 fragments.  From this we deduce that the Founding Date alone is not sufficient to determine the amount of Fragments in the Cache.

 

Length of Habitation definitely seems to be an important factor in deciding how many fragments per cache, but age of deed is also important.

One thing we do not know at this stage is whether the amount of fragments found increases as the server ages (and thus the age of the deed increases) or whether the number of fragments is adjusted to remain constant.

As we've seen by comparing old deeds on old servers vs new deeds on new servers, it is tempting to predict that the number of fragments will increase year on year until they reach a cap (presumably max 20 fragments although unconfirmed).

Perhaps a good experiment would be to return in subsequent years and examine these same deeds again with the same Report QL, and see if the total number of fragments in the caches has indeed increased, or whether they have stayed the same.  I will endeavour to preserve some report papers of this same QL (73.68ql) for that purpose. It must be remembered that I may gain some skill in this time!

 

Edited by Muse
Added more data and archaeological findings - 19 April 2021
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think i ever discussed this with anyone, i always tought this was pretty much common knowledge and never looked at the wiki page.

The age of the deed is definitively a factor, in fact, few years ago (rl years) i could almost never find more than 10 fragments on Xanadu, because all the deeds in my area were too recent.

My theory is that somewhere in the formula it pretty much sums up the "abandoned in" and the "occupied for" times, they are equally important and are summed up in the "total" number, the higher that number is, the bigger the cache.

This is based on my 2-3years ago experience, might have changed in the meantime

With 95+ql reports and very old deeds i think i've got to at least 18 fragments , maybe even 20 iirc.


edit: Also, the more fragments you find in the cache, the higher the quality of those fragments will be

Edited by Davih
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting read.  Thank you Muse for taking the time to document all that.  I really have been enjoying archaeology and having more insight in it can only help make it more enjoyable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live on Xan and have almost 90 archeology skill, and I didn't even know it was possible to get more than 10 frags per cache.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QL of reports, how long ago the deed fell & your skill as well as RNG all play in quantity and quality of frags from deed caches, in my experience.

 

How many fallen deeds there are, skill, trowel/shovel ql and RNG all play into ql of frags from normal tiles. Again, from my experience.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ajala said:

I live on Xan and have almost 90 archeology skill, and I didn't even know it was possible to get more than 10 frags per cache.

 

Have got more than 10 frags in a number of places on Xanadu. Looking for places deeds were created in the early days of Xanadu will likely give more than 10 frags per cache.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of interesting points! 

 

For the report QL, it's an average of your skill AND the report quality, capped at 85. 

 

I have my own findings from experimenting, things such as age of deed, how long it's been abandoned for also playing a part 

 

Indy is the best for the big caches, up in the north. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Retrograde said:

 

I have my own findings from experimenting, things such as age of deed, how long it's been abandoned for also playing a part 

 

 Could you share anything about how to get the information about age of deed? I made a request regarding that here earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Retrograde said:

Lots of interesting points! 

 

For the report QL, it's an average of your skill AND the report quality, capped at 85. 

 

I have my own findings from experimenting, things such as age of deed, how long it's been abandoned for also playing a part 

 

Indy is the best for the big caches, up in the north. 


I would like to understand this better. Am I correct in assuming that using higher ql than 85 for report paper is therefore useless if archeology is at 90+?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Retrograde said:

For the report QL, it's an average of your skill AND the report quality, capped at 85.

 

Forgive me, I don't really understand the line about the Report QL @Retrograde- it seems to have 'report QL' on both sides of the equation

 

- did you mean For the Report QL, it's the average of your skill and the PAPER QL capped at 85?, or otherwise, please can you expand on that? :) 

 

Thanks! :) 

Edited by Muse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just made a rare blank paper sheet, so obviously I'm dying to know whether report rarity has any effect on caches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ajala said:

I just made a rare blank paper sheet, so obviously I'm dying to know whether report rarity has any effect on caches.

It didn't for me and it was a pita to finish that report for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you do a summery of alloy+ type fragments from each deed? Not from the caches, but from the ground.

Edited by jaytoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jaytoo said:

can you do a summery of alloy+ type fragments from each deed? Not from the caches, but from the ground.

 

No. Lol.

 

Not for these deeds anyway because most of them overlap (most of them were deeded on and around the same site).

 

I can get hundreds of fragments from this site, and sorting each one by deed of origin as they come up would be far too labour intensive.  Remember also, that some fragments are found on their own without seeing a deed name in the event messages.

 

For example:

[15:32:45] You pick out a fragment of some item wedged into the ground.
[15:32:45] You can't find any traces of any abandoned settlements here.

 

and:

 

[14:27:52] You pick out a fragment of some item wedged into the ground.
[14:27:52] You can't quite make anything definitive out, but there may have once been a settlement here.

 

Maybe if you can find some singleton deeds (that don't overlap any others) you could give it a go :) 

 

@AjalaI think Fabricant did a Twitch stream where he had a rare report, but the cache he found was not rare, unfortunately.

Edited by Muse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm there is some figure which determines how much a deed contributes to the fragments, and I'm interested in finding out if it's even possible to get alloy fragments from the ground on the new servers yet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More data added today, several deeds with arch reports at constant QL. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably a long shot, but have you checked whether the wood type of the report has any bearing on the token metal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ajala said:

Probably a long shot, but have you checked whether the wood type of the report has any bearing on the token metal?

 

That's a very good suggestion.  

 

I have not experimented with paper made from woodscraps, all these reports are made using papyrus sheets made from reeds.  Using papyrus I've obtained the full range of metal types, so the token metal type isn't restricted by the papyrus at least.

 

Thanks. :) 

Edited by Muse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on my test of three caches today, there's no direct correlation between wood type and token type. Not saying it doesn't factor into the equation, just that two different wood types both delivered copper tokens. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2021 at 6:49 AM, Ajala said:

Based on my test of three caches today, there's no direct correlation between wood type and token type. Not saying it doesn't factor into the equation, just that two different wood types both delivered copper tokens. 

 

That has been my experience also.  I usually use 40-50 ql wood scrap made paper, so much lower ql on the reports, and I have only ever seen 10 in a cach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting read, thanks to Ajala for directing me to it.

 

My question is how many Moonmetal fragments have you had from the Caches?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2021 at 9:43 AM, Hailiah said:

how many Moonmetal fragments have you had from the Caches?

 

It's very rare to find moonmetal fragments, and I've only ever found a few.  Only guessing, but in the past few months I've probably found one or two moonmetal fragments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this