101 replies to this topic

[RJEM]

Yes, I'm giving you a slightly hard time. Sue me, I don't have much time to troll this forum anymore.

Consider your *** duly sued. Good to see you around I have Deflect 175 should you ever wish to dish out some frustration yourself!

I'll be interested to see what the cows have to say about my ticket on the FI results.

[scarsick]

I know inventors and bounty hunters who have either great (Evilaltor) or horrible (StickIsGod) inventing luck, and bounty hunters who have awesome times with deflect (me, on a good day) and insanely bad luck (me, on a bad day) with deflect.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you look at the RNG for Fallen Sword itself, it's not really random. It shows a distressing propensity to remember past success or failure. If you can dig up some of avvakum's old posts, one or two of them display photographic representations of the RNG, and it is most definitely NOT strictly random.

First of all, most RNGs "remember" by design, because that's how they work. They have a "fixed" algorithm that converts one number to another, returns the result and keeps it stored. When called next time, they use the result, convert it to another, return the value and keep it.

Second, HCS wouldn't be the first (and the last) developers to seed (provide the first number) the RNG with something very far from random. I've witnessed such horrible cases as seeding something with userid (or userid plus something), so some users were forever sentenced to bad luck.

A post by Hoof would be very much appreciated concerning this......it does seem that some individuals in this game are far more "lucky" than others in terms of RNG dominated activities like inventing, arena, scavenging etc


I think it's high time that the seeding of this game be checked or maybe even altered to provide a more fair gameplay experience for all players

[RJEM]

Having done statistical analysis similar to RJEM in both inventing and in scavenging, I can say that seeding does, indeed, exist.

I've attempted over 400 inventions with Inventor II active. I have never saved all the components of an invent, and in fact I've never saved more than 2.

However, I know other inventors who regularly do full saves within 20 or 30 major invents.

Arena wins are another great example. You can check records, some players have better luck with judges and 2 percents. It's no animus - I'm not involved in the game very much any more - it's just simple objective observation. Other games in other places with other systems have had non random number generators, and FS is no exception. If RJEM has some of the pics avvakum managed to create with the RNG, you'd immediately understand.

Unfortunately I can't find his post anywhere. Any help would be appreciated in digging it out (if it hasn't been pruned). It does illustrate things nicely.

[michael65]

Congratulations OP!! You proved HCS's numbers are correct -statistically speaking- while at the same time showing the Myth to be true. Think about it. Why would anyone use algebra to solve liklihood of outcome when given a probabilty? I see 43%, I think 43 out of 100 OR 21.5 / 50. So for 50 attempts I'm thinking 21-22 deflects, not the 30-31 deflects you got.

Getting bad runs of "luck" are part of statistics. So based on some posters arguments, the cows should do nothing (since posters arguments fail).

About RNG, I have assumed the RNG the cows use is bought and thus have a manual and hopefully support. Also, that the RNG was running a normal curve. None of this needs to be true. And definitely the RNg should not be individualized as per Coyotik was worrying about.

[HazedOne]

Your using gamblers logic, it doenst matter how many hits you do, each hit has its own set of parameters. Theoretically you can be deflected the entirety of a bounty/GVG (until its finished by someone else or you give up). To say ill only be deflect 43 out of 100 attacks will never actually pan out, it may be more, or less. Even then you've done 57 successful attacks after 200 minutes, you still have 43 attacks to go (86 minutes) but if we throw in the 43% on the 43 then its 18 (36 minutes) deflects which equals 61 deflects 322minutes on a 100 hit GvG. The odds are the same every hit, so you cant use large groups of attacks to prove this or that, there is too much randomness. Ive seen 10 hit on the roulette table 4 times in a row. Of course nobody bet on it, what are the odd of it happening 4 time in a row? Thats the wrong question to ask, the former has nothing to do with the current. Basically, odds dont stack, each hit is its own, and as it is there is roughly a 50% chance to hit, 50/50 dont sound too kosher to me, especially when the PVP ladder is concerned and you can only hit every hour instead of 2 minutes...

[RJEM]

Your using gamblers logic, it doenst matter how many hits you do, each hit has its own set of parameters. Theoretically you can be deflected the entirety of a bounty/GVG (until its finished by someone else or you give up). To say ill only be deflect 43 out of 100 attacks will never actually pan out, it may be more, or less. Even then you've done 57 successful attacks after 200 minutes, you still have 43 attacks to go (86 minutes) but if we throw in the 43% on the 43 then its 18 (36 minutes) deflects which equals 61 deflects 322minutes on a 100 hit GvG. The odds are the same every hit, so you cant use large groups of attacks to prove this or that, there is too much randomness. Ive seen 10 hit on the roulette table 4 times in a row. Of course nobody bet on it, what are the odd of it happening 4 time in a row? Thats the wrong question to ask, the former has nothing to do with the current. Basically, odds dont stack, each hit is its own, and as it is there is roughly a 50% chance to hit, 50/50 dont sound too kosher to me, especially when the PVP ladder is concerned and you can only hit every hour instead of 2 minutes...

I just don't see the relevance here? I clearly don't use previous results to forecast future ones - all I'm assuming is an average of 43.75% should appear over an extended sample set. If you do 10000 attacks I would wager a fair amount on you getting close to 4375 deflects (plus or minus some variance).

As for the bolded part - well, most of modern science would disagree with you, and I'm siding with them on this one. By the way, the odds of getting 10 four times in a row aren't really that high in the grand scheme of things - far lower than winning the UK lottery jackpot.

[RJEM]

Congratulations OP!! You proved HCS's numbers are correct -statistically speaking- while at the same time showing the Myth to be true. Think about it. Why would anyone use algebra to solve liklihood of outcome when given a probabilty? I see 43%, I think 43 out of 100 OR 21.5 / 50. So for 50 attempts I'm thinking 21-22 deflects, not the 30-31 deflects you got.

Getting bad runs of "luck" are part of statistics. So based on some posters arguments, the cows should do nothing (since posters arguments fail).

About RNG, I have assumed the RNG the cows use is bought and thus have a manual and hopefully support. Also, that the RNG was running a normal curve. None of this needs to be true. And definitely the RNg should not be individualized as per Coyotik was worrying about.

Sorry Michael - this post is totally wrong.

I got 31 deflects on 81 attacks (50 of which were successful), not 31 on 50. The myth is false.

[SirAdmiral]

How is that low? That's pretty high. The stamina it costs to cast the buff is well worth it for that many deflects.

How is what low?

If you mean my original post, 39.9% is a bit low compared to the expectation value of 43.75%. It's actually a buff which activates a lot for the stamina cast - hence the HUGE frustration it can cause.

Reading comprehension fail on my part. Either way 39.9 is a lot lol.

[HazedOne]

I just don't see the relevance here? I clearly don't use previous results to forecast future ones - all I'm assuming is an average of 43.75% should appear over an extended sample set. If you do 10000 attacks I would wager a fair amount on you getting close to 4375 deflects (plus or minus some variance).

As for the bolded part - well, most of modern science would disagree with you, and I'm siding with them on this one. By the way, the odds of getting 10 four times in a row aren't really that high in the grand scheme of things - far lower than winning the UK lottery jackpot.

Your talking about probability, which is gamblers logic. The last hit has nothing to do with the next hit or the hit 500 places down the line. Each hit has a chance of being deflected or not.

Lets run a theoretical situation here:

You start a 50 hit GvG and bam right off the bat:

1. ddaddaddaaddadddddddaddddaaaa = 29 hits to get 10 kills
2. ddddadddddddaddaaddaddaddaaaaa = 30 hits to get 10 kills

20 kills and 59 deflects, is it safe to say that the next 30 hits deflect will not activate?

You cant say yes, because there is a 43% the next hit will deflect, regardless of what the data says. Then the hit after that, same 43% is there waiting.

Your math works if you have large volumes of hits to work with. Probability starts losing its hold when you put a restraint on the amount of hits you can do. Of course 43% will show up if you keep connecting/adding data. But will it show in bounties? Will it show on the PvP ladder? I think not. Deflect isnt too big an issue in GvG, you have the opportunity at more targets to accomplish the goal.

The last bounty i cleared went 11 defelcts to get 10 kills. Ive had better against 175 and worse.

The point is "the grand scheme" doesnt matter, its the the 10 kills that i need to do now that matter, or the 5 kills i need to get on the ladder, not the ones before it, and most certainly not to the ones after it. Each set should be examined on their own, because an average isnt actually whats goin on. Its just the average.

With the cited examples up there, whos to say if the next bounty doesnt go the same way? 1000 hits from now the 43% will eat it and the lost bounties/ungained rating wont be mentioned.

Statistically you can make money off black jack using probability if you have enough money, can you make the same money off 25 bucks? Probably not.

P.S. I have no problem with the 175 buff (well i do, but its part of the game i can live with it) i dont like the idea of a higher level. And i really like to gamble, but i dont really play black jack...

[RJEM]

I just don't see the relevance here? I clearly don't use previous results to forecast future ones - all I'm assuming is an average of 43.75% should appear over an extended sample set. If you do 10000 attacks I would wager a fair amount on you getting close to 4375 deflects (plus or minus some variance).

As for the bolded part - well, most of modern science would disagree with you, and I'm siding with them on this one. By the way, the odds of getting 10 four times in a row aren't really that high in the grand scheme of things - far lower than winning the UK lottery jackpot.

Your talking about probability, which is gamblers logic. The last hit has nothing to do with the next hit or the hit 500 places down the line. Each hit has a chance of being deflected or not.

Lets run a theoretical situation here:

You start a 50 hit GvG and bam right off the bat:

1. ddaddaddaaddadddddddaddddaaaa = 29 hits to get 10 kills
2. ddddadddddddaddaaddaddaddaaaaa = 30 hits to get 10 kills

20 kills and 59 deflects, is it safe to say that the next 30 hits deflect will not activate?

You cant say yes, because there is a 43% the next hit will deflect, regardless of what the data says. Then the hit after that, same 43% is there waiting.

Your math works if you have large volumes of hits to work with. Probability starts losing its hold when you put a restraint on the amount of hits you can do. Of course 43% will show up if you keep connecting/adding data. But will it show in bounties? Will it show on the PvP ladder? I think not. Deflect isnt too big an issue in GvG, you have the opportunity at more targets to accomplish the goal.

The last bounty i cleared went 11 defelcts to get 10 kills. Ive had better against 175 and worse.

The point is "the grand scheme" doesnt matter, its the the 10 kills that i need to do now that matter, or the 5 kills i need to get on the ladder, not the ones before it, and most certainly not to the ones after it. Each set should be examined on their own, because an average isnt actually whats goin on. Its just the average.

With the cited examples up there, whos to say if the next bounty doesnt go the same way? 1000 hits from now the 43% will eat it and the lost bounties/ungained rating wont be mentioned.

Statistically you can make money off black jack using probability if you have enough money, can you make the same money off 25 bucks? Probably not.

P.S. I have no problem with the 175 buff (well i do, but its part of the game i can live with it) i dont like the idea of a higher level. And i really like to gamble, but i dont really play black jack...

I explained all this in my original post truck - you're not wrong, but you are being misleading. I'm perfectly aware that on any one bounty the situation may be different, hence the examples I cited. I also showed one where things went well for the prospective clearer.

My point is that it is a mistake to focus only on 'this' bounty for your perception, which you are doing. You can't say that the next one will be deflect-free because you had a hard time on this one - but you CAN be confident that over MANY more bounties you will have no worse luck than the average player.

By the way - gambler's logic is that if I have had 8 reds in a row the next one has a higher probability of being black because of that streak. It's a well defined fallacy which statistical averaging does not fall into. The difference is that statistics makes no distinction between this next attack and one 600 down the line, so can't make definite predictions, other than that the average will be adhered to over time.

Lets look at 2 situations to make what I am saying clearer.

First up - a bad run of luck - 50 hits, 30 deflects. That's seriously bad luck - a 60% activation rate.

What am I saying? I'm saying that if you do several hundred more attacks your average % will return to close to the normal activation rate. You're saying the chance is precisely 43.75% for the next attacks regardless, I agree:

Second Run - 50 hits, 22 deflects. That's a 44% rate for this subset.

But, lo and behold, combine them and what happens:

100 hits, now a combined rate of 52%. Based on your luck in the first trial, your activation rate is returning to the norm, even by activating at the 'expected frequency'.

Please don't lecture me on things I fully understand - after a run of bad (or good) luck, statistics says that over time you will average out to 43.75%, without commiting the sin of saying more 'reds' must come up because you've had a run of blacks.

Imagine if the 2nd trial had been 950 attacks with 415 deflects (as you would agree should be the case). What's your overall %, regardless of the poor streak to begin with? - 44.5% - a definite regression to the expected value, even with perfectly logical activation in this subset.

No fallacy here, sorry.

[Khanate]

Don't worry about the statistics trolls, they'll say anything to show that deflect activates more than it does.

[HazedOne]

So you proved what we already know.

0.25*175=43.75

The math is inarguable, my guff with the "debunking" is the fact is, no matter the proof of theoretical evidence the 43.75% is NOT relevant where it really matters. You and I are arguing 2 different things I think, but where your argument uses the WHOLE (which is not realistic) im trying to break it down to a incident by incident basis (which is the way PvP works), which you do not bring to a full circle anywhere in the original post. I may hit a bad run on a 200 ticket bounty, but I may hit a good run on a 1 ticket bounty, 2 entirely different situations. Or vise versa, making the 200 ticket bounty pretty much a waste of time. Your only accounting for stats, not time and effort, thats where the gamblers logic im talking about comes in. Your numbers mean absolutely nothing to me, at any time. Im not going to look at 43.75% out of 10000 attacks because the 43.75% does not matter in such a broad spectrum. Im looking at a hit by hit rate, because i put time and effort into it (i honestly dont mean to disrespect your research in that aspect). Youre looking at a bounty clear as one in a line of numbers, but when only 10 kills at a time are involved, 43.75 doesnt mean much. Its sets of 10 you need to look at, but also with that if you line up 100 sets of 10 43.75% WILL show up, as it should. BUT the 10 kills and 20 deflects will happen, and thats what im talkin about. No matter if the odds look like i shouldnt get deflected, it might or might not. 43.75% is absolute through a infinite number, but 43.75% in 10 hits means very very little. Each bounty will have a different % of deflected attacks, and you could never try to calculate those numbers (its just impossible).

Your comparison of runs is exactly the point im trying to get across, your first run could be 60%, and the second could also be 60%. if it happened in one bounty whats to say it wont happen again ( or 4 times in a row) there is a probability of it happening. Now if those 4 were counted into 100 bounty clears, your numbers would still come up on top, but those few bounties i would be straight up screwed. You see what im getting at? this + this doesnt necessarily mean that.