DarkKnight271
-
Posts
123 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DarkKnight271
-
-
6 hours ago, (XB1)Thy Divinity said:
There's none to make.
RNG
Random Number Generator
Random Number
Random
Which aren't truly random because algorithms can't actually generate truly random numbers.
-
1 minute ago, Buff00n said:
Going 0 for 14 on a common drop from radiant shares is about a 1 in 270,000 chance:
(1-0.2)^(14*4) = 0.000374% = 1/267726
Given that there are tens of millions of registered players, lets conservatively assume 100,000 of them have spent time looking for your particular relic. If you calculate the probability that this extremely unlikely result will happen to at least one player:
1-(1-0.00000374)^100000 = 31.212%
This is well above the usual p=0.05 burden of proof to reject the hypothesis that the drop rates are correct. You would need to go at least 0 for 17 to get below 5%.
According to this estimate, there is roughly a 31% chance that at least one player will go 0 for 14, and that player is you.
I said uncommon, not common. It was 15 runs, not 14. And I don't care that "I" didn't get the uncommon drop, but that NO ONE got the uncommon drop after 15 runs.
-
2 hours ago, (XB1)Shodian said:
No, the probability of it happening stays the same. Every time you open a relic you have a 20% chance of getting the part you want. This chance does not increase or decrease depending on how many times in a row you open the same relic. You are sadly just extremely unlucky.
Except you're wrong. I'm not talking about the chance that each individual relic gets a drop, I'm talking about the probability of a SERIES of relics getting a drop.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/games/games_9.html
Maybe this will help explain probability to you.
-
7 hours ago, rune_me said:
Lol no, that's not how randomness and statistics works. That's called the Gambler's Fallacy. Another simple concept in probability that most people know about. It's flawed thinking and not how things work at all. Look it up.
To put it simple, if you didn't get it the first time, your odds does not increase the second time. The odds are the same for the second time, as they were for the first time. If you don't roll a six in your first roll of a die, you are not more likely to roll a six the second time. It's still just 1 in 6.
Surely you've heard of something called "probability"? There's a lot a math out there regarding probability. That's what I'm referring to, though maybe not a clearly as I should have. And yes, you're right, each separate relic roll has it's own 20% (or whatever) chance of an uncommon part dropping. But the probability of not having that part drop in 60 combined attempts becomes less and and less probable with each roll. Is it mathematically possible for you to not get a specific part even after 100, or even 1,000 rolls, yes, but the probability of that happening is extraordinarily small.
-
7 hours ago, (PS4)Mono-Pop said:
I don’t believe for a second you got 3 people to open 15 of the same relic with you.
What you believe or don't is irrelevant to this conversation.
-
9 hours ago, rand0mname said:
What uncommon costs more then 50 rares? Even if you sell them as prime junk, it is a lot of plat.
Go to warframe.market and look up the cost of various parts. There are rare parts that sell for 1 to 5 plat because they are so common and uncommon parts that sell for 70 to 100 plat because they are so rare.
-
3 hours ago, rune_me said:
No my example has nothing at all to do with taking thousands of variables into account. A coin flip has only two outcomes and there's a 50% for either. It doesn't have to be a real coin, it can be purely a thought experiment. Or if you want to use software, you can code it to be more true to a game.
The rule still holds true. The more times you iterate the experiment, the more the result will approach the statistically most likely outcome. If you only do it 10 times, you will not get a useful result, because you could end up with a result that varies widely from the most likely. If you do it 10 million times, though, you will get a result very close to 50-50, simply because it would be so statistically unlikely to give anything else that it will never happen.
If you get rares all the time while opening relics with your friends, it doesn't mean the odds are broken. It just mean you got 10 tails in a row. Unlikely, sure, but not at all impossible.
Are you... Okay, let's try to school you a little bit kiddo. You're confusing results with what can influence the result. If you flip a coin there are one of two options, heads or tails... technically there's a third option of it landing on it's edge but that's a complication for another time. What I'm talking about when I say that there are hundreds of thousands of variables are all the things that can influence the coin. Some of them are, how hard was it flipped, how many times did it rotate, how close or far from the equator were you when you flipped it, was there an air current, was it hot, was it cold, was it somewhere in between, was it raining, was it humid, what was the barometric pressure, was it an old coin, was it a new coin, what was the coin made of, did the coin have any defects, etc.
These are all things that influence if you get the result of heads or tails. So, as a result, smaller sample sizes will reveal skewed results, that's why you need larger sample sizes.
As to using software to be more "true to a game", like I've said several times and that you seem to be ignoring. Computers cannot do truly random numbers. It's 100% impossible. So saying that RNG is truly random and that you just have bad luck is a complete pile of BS. Computer games can attempt to replicate randomness but they cannot achieve it. Because if they could achieve it, then a 20% drop rate would be 20% no matter the sample size. So let's use my example of 15 attempts. I should have had 2 drops in the first 10 attempts, since I didn't I should have had 3 drops in the next 5. That didn't happen either. Now you take that and multiply by 4 people and the odds of not getting a 20% drop (or whatever percent the "uncommon" drops are) in 15 attempts is kind of ridiculous because the drop rates are obviously not what they should be.
-
9 hours ago, Talinthis said:
In that case you should be happy. Sell the gold rares and buy like 10 uncommons if you want them.
rng doesnt follow strict statistic percentages for drop sample sizes. Chances are it wont drop 2 out of 10 times every time like your example.
Back when i played ragnarok online I got 4 cards that had less than a 1% drop chance in less than an hour. Just because I got them doesnt mean the math is broke, and that is exactly what you are saying here. Also in ff XIV I failed a 20% materia infusion 35 times
I don't care about other games as they don't matter to this conversation.
As to selling the rares to buy the uncommons... yeah, that's not possible. Those "rare" drop so regularly it would take something like 50 to be able to buy even one of these "uncommon" drops.
-
8 hours ago, rune_me said:
Not even a little bit.
You can flip a coin 10 times and get tail all times. That happens and is cetainly statistically likely. You can not flip a coin 10.000 times and get 10.000 tails. That is so improbable that you won't ever see it happening. Which is why sample size is important, and why a sample size of 10 certainly don't yield the same results as a sample size of 10.000.
The larger the sample size, or the more you iterate the experiment, the more the result will approach the statistically most likely outcome.
Except, in your example, you have to take into account hundreds of thousands of variables which is why you need a larger sample size. In a video game there are no random variables. Statistics are pretty much only used because of you need to find an average without being able to account for all of the variables of life. Unlike in real life, when you're in a computer environment, all variables are programmed in and specific. Like I said above there's no such thing as a truly random number generator inside of a computer system. It's a 100% impossibility at this time. So if an item has a drop rate of 20% then it should be 20% across the board. So if the item only drops at a 20% chance when you get to 10,000 or 100,000 chances but not when you're under that, the drop rate is broken.
-
14 hours ago, trst said:
But that is the problem: your sample size is not large enough to determine if the rates are correct or not. But all of this is simply how these systems work; the system that Warframe uses.
People can argue for a different system like a pseudorandom one (like you mentioned) or even a token system like people have asked for in the past (how the Arbitrations shop works). But this thread is about the system being "broken" which it isn't.
It most definitely is broken. For starters, let's dispell the notion that Random Number Generators in a computer system are actually random. They're not. Until we have Quantum Computing I doubt they ever actually will be and even then it's not guaranteed.
That being said, does luck play a part in this, sure, but if you run a full group, all with the same radiant relic 15 times in a row any you only see three of the six possible choices come up and the "rare" drop showed up more than one of the uncommon drops that never showed up at all it tells me that there maybe something funny going on behind the scenes. Like the drop rate for that specific item may be off.
It this was truly random and adhered to statistics then sample size shouldn't matter, a sample size of 10 should have the same statistics as a sample size of 10,000. So if that uncommon drop was a 20% chance it should have dropped twice in the lower sample size and 2,000 times for the larger. If it drops 0 times in the smaller but still 2,000 times in the larger there's something wrong.
-
2 minutes ago, trst said:
Doesn't sound like anything is broken.
Actually it sounds like they're working as intended and you got unlucky.
You do understand the difference between common, uncommon and rare in a normal game where drop rates work properly right? I shouldn't have a greater chance of getting a rare drop than an uncommon or common drop. And it shouldn't take as many or more relics to get an uncommon drop than a rare drop. That's broken. If you don't agree, that's fine, that's your opinion, but you are wrong.
-
2
-
-
It shouldn't take 15x4 relics to get an uncommon item to drop. And it shouldn't take that many for a common item to drop. You all need to fix the drop rates of relics.
-
2
-
-
On 2018-12-16 at 7:17 AM, 0_The_F00l said:
My bad , forgot that you dont need Eidolon shards to reach R3 only intact cores.
but ranking up without fighting eidolons ... thats gonna need some serious time.
So you get the original query resolved?
Nope, don't care anymore and moved on to to trying to farm Ivara... but when I play spy missions for hours and never get a BP drop it's a little discouraging.
-
On 2018-12-13 at 2:32 AM, 0_The_F00l said:
Pretty sure you just missed the correct dialog option.
How did you manage with mote amp to reach rank 3 anyway?
By playing the game... it's like the people who wonder how I got to rank 15 or 16 or whatever rank I am and still "don't know things". It's not that terribly hard to do. Get gear, level gear. For syndicates, equip symbol, or in this case get cores... it's not that hard, you don't even need to fight Eidolons to get cores.
-
I'm like 80% sure mine doesn't say that. But I don't have max rep with the Quills either... so maybe that's why.
-
I don't have a vendor. There's the person you can turn in cores for standing with but I don't have the ability to buy anything from him. I'm not at my computer so I can't put up a screen shot.
-
Okay... then my game is broken because I don't seem to have the ability to buy amp parts.
-
So I was leveling up some rep with the Quills and I managed to pick two Amp braces (these are the only parts I have for a new Amp at this point) for rewards... as near as I can tell you can't actually buy Amp parts, like you can Zaw parts, so how badly did I screw this up? Will it actually be possible for me to build an Amp other than the free one you get at this point? I believe I have 3 levels of rank with the Quills at this point.
-
Is it at all possible to make it so hunting is NOT interrupted 100% of the time by enemies that show up and attack as soon as the animals show up? Between the bugs in hunting and the 100% fail chance because of these "random" encounters I've never been able to actually complete a hunt. It would be great if this could be fixed at some point.
-
Keep PVP as minimal in this game as possible. Not every game needs, or benefits from PVP. Forced PVP is why I stopped playing Destiny and I will definitely stop playing this game if it goes that route.
-
54 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:
We'll Umbra can't be that "early" as the betrayal that the Vitruvian represented talked about the creation of the warframes and the addition of the Tenno in past tense.
I don't think there is any suggestion one way or the other that Umbra is an "Experiment" (After all, this is after Ballas had betrayed the Orokin, why would he be innovating Warframes at that point, surely he would stop any experimentation that may give the orokin an advantage)
But that is mostly irrelevant anyway, Umbra is replicable and positioned after the bulk of the Warframe project is complete as a function of the betrayal, it's discovery and the punishment of Isaah's father. Whatever is "special" about Umbra is poorly defined to the point we really can't assert anything specific. It's simply undefined for the moment.
One thing that is special about Umbra... he's uniquely able to fight Sentients. Even without his custom mods his primal scream has a unique (as far as I know) affect against them.
-
1 hour ago, Toppien said:
even with slideshows people dont understand that all waframes were made in the same way
I don't remember seeing a slideshow anywhere, but if I missed something I'd like to know where to look. I'm going mostly off memory and I'm fairly new to the game.
-
6 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:
Umbra may well have been unique but the Warframe we use is indeed created in our foundry, regardless of how he was initially created, he dies at the hands of Natah and we recreated him from scans. Ordis is pretty clear on this topic:
What make Umbra "special" is unclear the only information we are given that differs from the usual warframe is this:
Everything in the virtuvian is stated as generic information about all Warframes, not Umbra specific, which is supported by the Valkyr and Mirage Prime trailers.
At some point the Orokin stopped using humans as raw materials and started duplicating and/or modifying past creations without the need for human sacrifice (as illustrated by using the Old-War-era foundry we find in the Orbiter)
I get what you're saying but I still think Umbra is vastly different from any other Warframe. To me, it seems like Umbra was an experiment of some kind, maybe an early experiment or maybe a late experiment, it's hard to say. If it was an early experiment, then it would make sense that they would "dumb down" the later Warframes to make them more machine and less willful and independent. If it was a later experiment then maybe they were looking for a way to get rid of the Tenno who were becoming too powerful and wanted something that was easier to control with less free will.
This is how I see it anyway and why I think Umbra is Unique and not at all like the other Warframes.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Urlan said:
That is supported by the quest yes, I would have to agree.
I believe this is the whole point of The Sacrifice, to show you how unique Umbra is... the other thing to keep in mind is that while other Warframes are built, piece by piece, Umbra is not assembled. And Umbra has a will of it's own.
-
2
-
Garuda or Revenant (Read Description Pls)
in Players helping Players
Posted
I thought Revenant was easier to get. You basically run bounties from Cetus and you will eventually get all the parts you need, plus there's a kind of cool quest to go with it. Garuda was harder for me to get and there's no accompanying quest so if I were going to buy one, that's the one I'd buy.