Stats after 1,279 fox hunts

[Tgo01]

raikhen: 146,706
successful hunts: 1,279
Average raikhen per hunt: 114.7
ferret: 107 (8.36%)
fox: 113 (8.83%)
mink: 116 (9.06%)
weasel: 146 (11.4%)
vole: 179 (14%)
shrew: 192 (15%)
muskrat: 210 (16.4%)
mouse: 216 (16.88%)
bugles found: 1 (0.08%)

The way I setup my script is it looks for the fox in a new room each time until it either finds the fox or time runs out for that run. The script then remembers all rooms it already observed/tracked in and during the next hunt it would again move to new rooms each time until all rooms had been observed/tracked then it would start all over again. I figured by going to a new room each time and between hunts it would give a better chance to find the fox since it's looking in new rooms and not just the same rooms over again, but then again I was under the assumption that the fox is in the same place between hunts (I know it moves but like it's still in the same position/moving between hunts.) I really have no idea if it works like this, for all I know the position of the fox is completely random each time you do a hunt.

Anywho. If I do more runs I'm just going to have the script search as soon as it finds tracks of an animal and compare those stats to the stats of actually looking for the fox.

UPDATE:

I did some pixie hunts but using a different strategy than my fox hunts. For my pixie hunts I observed the first room and if I got "many signs" I searched (obviously), if I got "no signs" I searched, if I got "incredibly tiny footprints" I searched until I got "no signs" then moved to the next room, in the second room I did the same for "many signs" and "no signs" and for "incredibly tiny footprints" I kept observing until I got "no signs" then searched.

Here are the results of my pixie runs:

Least raikhen: 120
Most raikhen: 130
raikhen: 175,286
successful hunts: 1,399
Average raikhen per hunt: 125.30
arnica: 344 (24.5%)
sweetspire: 352 (25.16%)
azalea: 366 (26.16%)
cattail: 328 (23.44%)
astrantia: 9 (0.6%)

So yeah, with searching when you get the message "no signs" you're guaranteed to get between 120 and 130 raikhen, and even with just searching the first 2 rooms I still managed to get the pixie 0.6% of the time.

If we take the number of times I found the fox while using the whole 90 seconds per round in order to search for the fox and subtract the 9 times I found the pixie anyways that's 104 more times I could have potentially found the pixie, considering the pixie on average only provides 25 more raikhen that's 2,600 extra raikhen I could have earned if I used the entire 90 seconds per hunt as opposed to the ~20-30 seconds per hunt.

Again unless someone found a strategy that I'm not aware of it doesn't really seem worth it to use up the entire 90 seconds as opposed to just searching when you see "no signs."

[TheLastShamurai]

I averaged roughly the same Raikhen over 250 hunts with just entering the first room, tracking and searching.

[Tgo01]

I averaged roughly the same Raikhen over 250 hunts with just entering the first room, tracking and searching.

Yeah I really think the whole thing is just completely random. Which is kind of disappointing.

[Rinualdo]

From Discord last night

Wyrom — Today at 12:19 AM
The fox hunt and ratacombs use the exact same logic. The only difference is, the ratacombs have shifting rooms and there are over 70 rooms it can be in. The fox/pixie hunt is much smaller and do not shift rooms, so the fox can move around. It is leading you somewhere, but there are 3 sections that don't connect via player rooms, but do connect for fox/pixie rooms.
Basically, you have cardinal directions that players can move, but then you have rooms that are adjacent that are just numerically in order for the fox/pixie to move around.
There is a divide though.
And it should not cross over that divide.

[LOL BRIELUS]

If it's random and not based on skill, isn't that just gambling?

[drumpel]

If it's random and not based on skill, isn't that just gambling?

You shut your god damn mouth!

All this RNG shit ain't gambling. It's based on the more you spend, the more likely you might get a result you like. You know, like those loot boxes in video games. If you spend enough on them, you just might get something you want.....kind of like pulling the handle on a slot machine, you might eventually get a result you like once you put enough money into it.

[Rjex]

Yeah, I don't get how you see this as gambling, it's just a game where you put money in for a small chance to win something.

[Menos]

Yeah, I don't get how you see this as gambling, it's just a game where you put money in for a small chance to win something.

Something of high material value, don't forget that part.

[Tgo01]

The fox hunt and ratacombs use the exact same logic. The only difference is, the ratacombs have shifting rooms and there are over 70 rooms it can be in. The fox/pixie hunt is much smaller and do not shift rooms, so the fox can move around. It is leading you somewhere, but there are 3 sections that don't connect via player rooms, but do connect for fox/pixie rooms.
Basically, you have cardinal directions that players can move, but then you have rooms that are adjacent that are just numerically in order for the fox/pixie to move around.
There is a divide though.
And it should not cross over that divide.

Uhm...what?

Regardless if people get roughly the same number of Raikhen over a couple hundred runs, whether they make an effort to find the fox or not, and the bugle is 100% luck based, then the whole thing is random and the idea of a fox "hunt" is just for show.

[Rinualdo]

I think the idea is that if you want pure raikhen, you joust. If you want a chance to also get a pet or whatnot but take less raikhen, you fox hunt.

[Tgo01]

I think the idea is that if you want pure raikhen, you joust. If you want a chance to also get a pet or whatnot but take less raikhen, you fox hunt.

That's fine. I just wish it were more honest instead of making it sound like you actually have more than a snowball's chance in hell of catching the fox in even half the hunts you do. As it stands now the fox hunt might as well just be one room.

Unless someone has figured out a way to catch the fox more often and is just keeping it a secret, which I suppose is possible.

[malmuddy]

I think the idea is that if you want pure raikhen, you joust. If you want a chance to also get a pet or whatnot but take less raikhen, you fox hunt.

How much do you make per joust? I can't seem to find that info anywhere.

[malmuddy]

With the caveats that I haven't done any fox hunts this year and I didn't actually collect/analyze the info from previous years, I'm pretty sure I averaged more raikhen than Dreaven posted in this thread. And how I did it was counterintuitive. I pretty consistently got more raikhen when searching in the areas that showed no signs of animals (I forget the exact messaging). Those areas would pretty consistently give raikhen in the upper non-fox range (maybe 120-130), where doing searches where there were signs of animals (but ultimately did not contain the fox) gave in the lower hundreds. Worth a shot if you're looking to maximize raikhen gain in the fox/pixie hunt.

Searching for the fox isn't worth it for the reward, unless as Dreaven said there is some trick to it that I never discovered.

[Tgo01]

How much do you make per joust? I can't seem to find that info anywhere.

I haven't done any jousting yet but I think people on Discord were saying you can get anywhere from 115-150, but both 115 and 150 are pretty rare. People said they were averaging between 135-140.

[Tgo01]

I pretty consistently got more raikhen when searching in the areas that showed no signs of animals (I forget the exact messaging). Those areas would pretty consistently give raikhen in the upper non-fox range (maybe 120-130), where doing searches where there were signs of animals (but ultimately did not contain the fox) gave in the lower hundreds.

Interesting if it actually works that way, but it's entirely possible.

[Tgo01]

People said they were averaging between 135-140.

And I just realized, assuming I didn't completely tank my average raikhen haul somehow and ~114 is the average for fox hunts, that it's actually better to just do jousts and use the extra raikhen you earn to buy the bugle from someone. Of course this requires finding someone who is actually selling it, and it's assuming you're someone who is going to do about 1200+ hunts/jousts, which of course isn't a given.

But let's take the lower end of jousting from what people on Discord were saying, 135, that's 21 more raikhen on average, that's almost 30k more raikhen if you're doing 1400 runs, and given the value of raikhen 30k is about what the bugle is worth.

Of course I don't know how long jousts are, they could be 3 minutes for all I know and you can do several fox hunts within that time so for time invested it's better to go the fox hunt route if that's the case. You also have the possibility of finding more than 1 bugle in which case you're better off doing fox hunts, but let's get real, the chances of finding more than one bugle within 1400 runs seems really really low.

[Rinualdo]

How much do you make per joust? I can't seem to find that info anywhere.
Over a few thousand runs, 139.x

[Dendum]

You get more Raikhen for searching a room with no sign of a fox than a room with fox signs...so you want to stop searching for the fox at 70 seconds at start searching for a room with no signs of fox to get max Raikhen.

[Tgo01]

You get more Raikhen for searching a room with no sign of a fox than a room with fox signs...so you want to stop searching for the fox at 70 seconds at start searching for a room with no signs of fox to get max Raikhen.

That's very odd.

[Dendum]

I didn't make the rules!
It works the same with the pixies though.

[malmuddy]

You get more Raikhen for searching a room with no sign of a fox than a room with fox signs...

Much easier way of saying what I was trying to communicate. Thank you for that. :)


so you want to stop searching for the fox at 70 seconds at start searching for a room with no signs of fox to get max Raikhen.

I did exactly this at first. But eventually I stopped looking for the fox all together and just searched in the first room I found with no signs of the fox. The problem is the reward for finding the fox is too small for how often you actually find it.

[Dendum]

Much easier way of saying what I was trying to communicate. Thank you for that. :)



I did exactly this at first. But eventually I stopped looking for the fox all together and just searched in the first room I found with no signs of the fox. The problem is the reward for finding the fox is too small for how often you actually find it.

Finding the fox is the only way to get those fancy titles though.

[Candor]

If it's random and not based on skill, isn't that just gambling?

Ding ding ding ding ding...chunk chunk chunk chunk chunk...

[malmuddy]

So I did about 20 fox hunts this morning, and did not see a raikhen number under 120 when searching in a room with no sign of the fox.

I also caught the fox 3 times without really trying, including literally my first try. But I still think that is more luck than anything else, and not sustainable over the long term.

[Amerek]

At least DR Arena uses combat, but they've watered it down so much there's really no need for skill there either. They just want your dollars.

[Tgo01]

I did some pixie hunts but using a different strategy than my fox hunts. For my pixie hunts I observed the first room and if I got "many signs" I searched (obviously), if I got "no signs" I searched, if I got "incredibly tiny footprints" I observed until I got "no signs" then moved to the next room, in the second room I did the same for "many signs" and "no signs" and for "incredibly tiny footprints" I kept observing until I got "no signs" then searched.

Here are the results of my pixie runs:

Least raikhen: 120
Most raikhen: 130 (I didn't count the times I caught the pixie and earned 150)
raikhen: 175,286
successful hunts: 1,399
Average raikhen per hunt: 125.30
azalea: 366 (26.16%)
sweetspire: 352 (25.16%)
arnica: 344 (24.5%)
cattail: 328 (23.44%)
astrantia: 9 (0.6%)

So yeah, with searching when you get the message "no signs" you're guaranteed to get between 120 and 130 raikhen, and even with just searching the first 2 rooms I still managed to get the pixie 0.6% of the time.

If we take the number of times I found the fox while using the whole 90 seconds per round in order to search for the fox and subtract the 9 times I found the pixie anyways that's 104 more times I could have potentially found the pixie, considering the pixie on average only provides 25 more raikhen that's 2,600 extra raikhen over 1399 hunts I could have earned if I used the entire 90 seconds per hunt as opposed to the ~20-30 seconds per hunt.

Again unless someone found a strategy that I'm not aware of it doesn't really seem worth it to use up the entire 90 seconds as opposed to just searching when you see "no signs."

[Dendum]

My pixie finding rate (based on a very small sample of 30 runs or so) is closer to 10%...which again based on that sample size could be luck. I use pixiepixie manual for the timer, enter the first room observe (to start the you see signs of movement message) run deeper into the field and observe and try to stay away from other searchers while I do it. If I notice I am running into the same room other people are getting to before me, and therefore searching before me, I will skip two rooms to get ahead of them. I never search the same room twice. When pixiepixie tells me I am at 70 seconds I switch to finding a no signs room and searching that...I tried pushing it out to 80 seconds but ended up with too many 100 Rak runs.

I do not know if that actually works but my rate is much higher than .6% percent to the point that RNG was very very kind or something else is going on.

[malmuddy]

It seems 10-15 is about the success rate of finding the fox/pixie if you are actually trying. TG's success rate of 0.6% is likely because he was staying in the first two rooms. The fox/pixie moves around, so you still have to be in right general area to find it. I think his point is the same one I tried to make, which is if your goal is to make as much raikhen as fast as possible doing fox/pixie hunts, just search the first room you OBSERVE/TRACK with no signs, and you'll even have a few cases where the fox/pixie comes to you.

What might be interesting is whether it is faster averaging ~125 on the hunts versus the ~139 quoted here on the jousting. I don't know how long jousts take, but I would think the fox/pixie hunts are faster when done like this.

[Fortybox]

None of these statistics matter. They don’t publish odds b/c they change them throughout the event.

[Rinualdo]

Wyrom said the success chance to finding the fox/pixie grows as each attempt globally is made.

[Tgo01]

Wyrom said the success chance to finding the fox/pixie grows as each attempt globally is made.

I think that's for the pet though, the bugle/morning glory.

[Rinualdo]

I think that's for the pet though, the bugle/morning glory.

Correct, that's what I meant.