Wow, that's dedication!  Did you level up at all during these 14000 clicks?!

Anyone feel like calculating the standard deviation to see if these differences are significant?

Sandy

>Did you level up at all during these 14000 clicks?! 
 
>>My character did level a few time, but the additional attributes points were not added to luck or persistence.

range of silvers/click: 181-294
range of xp's/click: 63-74

appears that silvers/click varies a lot, so there would be a difference based on squares.  but xp's/click seem almost an insignificant difference (though i haven't done calcs to figure out if it's statistically insignificant).

unfortunately, one of these two 'conclusions' is likely not correct, as silvers/click and xp's/click are somewhat dependant on each other (higher gems give more xp and more silvers).  in other words... i don't know what to take from the data, other than the fact that we might need 10,000 clicks per square :p

if i remember, i might try 1000 clicks/square/level with my digger in the graveyard, and post each lvl, to see how it relates, but over a bunch more tests (at 2 or 3 more luck each time).

--jason

>>unfortunately, one of these two 'conclusions' is likely not correct, as silvers/click and xp's/click are somewhat dependant on each other (higher gems give more xp and more silvers).

Well - to my mind, there should be a smaller variance between XP points, because XP points are still accumulated when ore is dug up. The theory being that although you might not gaining money from the click, you're still gaining experience. There isn't a huge variance in the numbers for shovel breaks and monster attacks, so you could argue that for each block, approximately the same amount of clicks were used in accumulating experience. 

Of course, the results would definitely be more significant in a 10k study, although that would be madness. 

I'll do the study again when my digger gets to 60 something luck, I reckon it could be done in a few months time.

Ok - have just completed a second 1000 click digger study of the dark district. This time they were performed at 59 luck. The results are quite interesting - 

From CC_________      Silvers/Click____________	XP/Click

2S 3E 1S 1E______                	444.898__________________	141.489
2S 3E 1S_________	440.097__________________	144.37
1S 2E____________	395.578__________________	121.763
4S_______________	437.647__________________	121.065
2S 2E 1S_________	425.668__________________	131.141
2S 3E 2S_________	386.584__________________	141.144
2S 3E____________	454.112__________________	125.054
2S 3E 2S 1E______  	366.569__________________	142.245
2S 2E____________	437.699__________________	125.201
3S_______________	435.591__________________	120.837
2S 1E____________	418.271__________________	121.102
2S_______________	389.895__________________	124.193
4S 1W____________	389.63__________________	117.673
1S 1E____________	348.181__________________	119.073


Some analysis to follow

So having done the 2 studies, there are a few points - 

1. Centroliums and hyperiums definitely make a huge difference. The first test was with a digger at 46, and with the benefit of hindsight, 1000 clicks probably weren't enough considering how much centroliums and hyperiums can skew the overall silvers in 1000 clicks.

2. On average, the increase in silvers/click was around 44%

3.In order to compare the 2 results I've used ranking statistics. Basically I've ranked each square in both tests according to (a) silvers/click and (b) a multiple of silvers/click and xp/click - weighted equally. You could argue that the stats are slightly flawed, as I've omitted comparing xp/click only. The assumption behind this is that diggers (well, mine anyway!) don't only dig for XP. I've then combined the rankings for each test and compared the new combined ranking for both tests for each of the criteria. I've then run a Spearman test on the 2 sets of ranks, and got a correlation statistic of 0.87, which is pretty high. 

So what does this all mean? Well - in short, digging in around the 2 casinos appears to yield both the highest silvers/click and combination of silvers and xp. Below is the table with final overall rankings per square using the results from both tests and both criteria. 

From CC_________	Overall Rank 

2S 3E 1S 1E______     1
2S 3E 1S_________	2
2S 3E____________	3
2S 2E 1S_________	4
4S_______________	5
1S 2E____________	6
2S 3E 2S_________	7
2S 2E____________	8
3S_______________	9
2S 1E____________	10
2S 3E 2S 1E______  	11
2S_______________	12
4S 1W___________	13
1S 1E____________	14

Ok, very good work.

How about doing one for Thord-Artin?

Yeah, have been considering doing one. At this stage, there aren't really enough cleared blocks in the Forest though. The little bit of test clicking I've done in the Fighter district suggests that there would be a lot of broken shovens and empty holes. 

If this block 

http://larkinorguide.com/cgi-bin/islands.cgi?act=block&bid=10486

  is cleared, there could be a decent patch of 12 blocks to test. Not that I've advocating where we splat next - that's a separate topic. 

i'm not sure how you count, but i currently see 13 cleared forest blocks on which you can dig.  unfortunately, they wouldn't all be a fair comparison, since some have monsters populated on them (which would attack you from time to time), and some are empty of monsters because they are on front lines where we cannot drop monsters.
--jason

Yeah - I excluded the 2 forest squares next to the mountain squares. 

Given the possibility of monster attacks, it might be interesting just to do tests on the frontline forrest squares. Although there are only a few squares where you can dig without being attacked - might be interesting to finally do a 10k click study. 

Your a more devoted digger than i am Mombossa.Good luck on the test.

Flossy 

Sorry for the mis spell Mombassa

WOW Mombassa your definitly a devoted person,ya set your mind ta do something and go for the goal.My Congates to you>:) 


ps. Thank You for this info:D

..Hobs

congates=Congratulations
   

need ta proofread better:(