Drop Rates, Datamines, and Digital Extremes (DDD).

[Spooky_Shuck]

22 hours ago, sinisteran said:

Feel free to comment or even correct me if what I stated was incorrect. I will remove it or change if necessary. 

 

I have never used these forums to post before, so apologies if I somehow screw up the formatting. There's a few things I'd like to address in Rob's post, but before I do, I'd like to state that just because you agree with Rob or myself, this doesn't mean that facts have suddenly been posted. This is a fairly complex case in an area of law that is still developing and often relies on archaic legislation never intended for this electronic era. This is just interpretation of the little information DE have given Void_Glitch and the community with regards to their threat of legal action. 

To put this as politely as I can, however; I am unsure how you can carry yourself in this discussion so arrogantly, as if you are dropping truth bombs, or whatever 'spilling tea' means, when you've really not demonstrated the comprehensive knowledge you'd need to back up such a self-assured tone.

 

However and this is the interesting part. What Void_glitch did breached the parameters of fair use and going into infringement of copyright. The Art- Prime access, Prisma stuff, Primed streamline. Is the intellectual property of Digital extremes and in extension to Leyou the parent. And posting such images are a breach. DE has in their EULA that all images of/ in the game are subject to copyright to ensure their protection. Therefore posting these mined images beforehand is a breach of their copyright. This is explicitly stated in section 3B

 

In my opinion, Rob is partially correct here, in that the artwork is naturally DE's intellectual property. However, I am unsure as to how he has assumed that simply posting artwork in itself would constitute as copyright infringement worthy of prosecution in the courts. Rob, to his credit, discussed this a little later on, but to reiterate with my own opinion;

I can post that artwork myself right here, if I wished, and unless I attempted to pass said work off as my own, attempted to profit from that artwork - the usual pitfalls - you'd be unlikely to find a court that would think such a matter was worth prosecution and punishment. It's a little tricky to discuss this with certainty, however, as this is one area of copyright law that has to be reasonably interpreted; posting an image of a mod is unlikely to get anywhere in court, but a wholesale rip of all the games artwork would be another story. It's one of those areas that has to be judged by the idea of 'common sense' - if I quote Einstein, you'd have a hard time pressing charges against me, but if I replicated all his written works and posted them here, his estate would have a case on their hands. 

Rob's list of leaks mostly doesn't seem to relate to intellectual property any more than it does announcements and so on, however. It's hard to gauge exactly how much artwork and so on was leaked. The script would be the most damning, certainly, but that was many years ago, and DE will have a hard time explaining why, if that was so damaging, they waited so long to press charges, and how they only seem to have gone from strength to strength financially afterwards regardless.

Ultimately, in my opinion, then, this would come down to whether Digital Extremes can present a case based on damages suffered. I'll discuss that in more detail below, but so far, I feel this is an academic point at best; I can't imagine many prosecutors, let alone judges, would find it in the public interest to press charges against a foreign teenager for posting images that he in no way attempted to take credit for, or profit from. 

Quote

b. All rights and title in and to the Software, the Game, the Service, the Site, your Account and all content included therein [EULA snip]

I don't really have much to say with regards to the EULA, as it's largely irrelevant. Digital Extremes have every right to ban whoever they see fit, but a license agreement is not a legally binding document that decides the law of the land as it sees fit. Any actual crimes mentioned within the EULA are already crimes, and simply disallowing something in such an agreement does not make it necessarily illegal in court - as again, this isn't a binding contract between companies, or a failure to provide an agreed upon product or service, it amounts to 'no cheating or we'll ban you'. If I fill trade chat with endless spam, they can ban me, but that doesn't mean they can sue me. So, yes, they can do whatever they like to Void_Glitch's account, but that's not usually relevant to a court case. There's little a EULA contributes as the law itself already determines lawful or unlawful acts.

That said, whilst I disagree with the above, this was mostly fine. Again, these parts come down to interpretation in large part. However, a great deal of Rob's post was not only arrogant, and extremely hyperbolic, but misinformed and misleading - arguably manipulative, as well. 

 

Quote

Secondly. Reverse engineering of computer software is a breach of contract.

This is outright, demonstrably false - at least, under US law, in this context. Rob's language is a little inconsistent here, as he first says breach of contract, but then discusses the crime of hacking. I'm going to assume, given the matter at hand, though, that Rob is asserting that reverse engineering is in some way an illicit violation of Digital Extreme's property. Again, this is not true in general, barring specifically protected exemptions, but in the US it is even a positive right.

Cases like Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. v. Connectix Corp. (2000) have very clearly affirmed the legal right to datamine, examine the interior code of a product, and then recreate your own with whatever knowledge you gleam. In other words, simply copy-pasting or otherwise replicating the exact code is naturally theft, but otherwise, even reverse engineering is considered fair use. In the US there is clear precedent permitting the cracking and examination of software and even using what you've learned to make your own product, as long as it is truly yours and not a one-to-one replication.  

Here's a very brief excerpt from copyright.gov:

The court concluded that the intermediate copies Connectix made and used during the course of its reverse engineering of the BIOS program were protected fair use, necessary to permit Connectix to make its non-infringing Virtual Game Station function with PlayStation games.

 This court's ruling was in part made in itself based on a preceding ruling by a considerably older but very similar case: Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc. (1992) - this precedent was set by the appellate courts and the supreme court declined to further deliberate on the matter. As far as precedent goes, in the US, when it comes to code, reverse engineering is entirely protected. There really isn't much else to say here: either Rob was asserting that this process is illegal, which it simply isn't, or he was just discussing the EULA still...which wouldn't make any sense given the rest of the paragraph and would be a moot point anyway.

Quote

Void_glitch will not be liable if : A: Despite his datamine Umbra was going to be hacked anyway and/or B: Umbra/ streamline was hacked completely without relation to his data mining.

As I've said, if you're simply basing this on datamining and reverse engineering, then this is again, entirely false, but more importantly;

I find the way you wrote this to be extremely odd, if not manipulative. Void_Glitch is, currently, by law, not liable for anything at all. As in, he has not even been charged. You speak of overwhelming bias, yet have written this as if his guilt is presumed and he must work to disprove DE's vague assertions. You know full well Void_Glitch's innocence is presumed and that DE must work to establish damages suffered etc. in a hearing, before Void_Glitch even needs to consider defending himself. 

Digital Extremes must provide very clear evidence that they suffered real damages as a result of...well, what exactly? People knowing Primed Streamline exists? With the same artwork as the non-Primed version? The hacking of a skin that is now years old and the Chinese already had access to? 

Well, good luck proving that that somehow caused untold financial damages, in a free to play game where the content in itself is offered free of charge. Unless Primed Streamline was going to be sold, that's not even in question, and I'm not sure how you can 'spoil' the existence of something that's already been publicly released for years elsewhere in the world. Given that very small percentages of a free to play game's population spend real money on the game, the oft-dubbed 'whales' of free to play games, this becomes even more nebulous. 

Quote

His actions potentially did immeasurable damage to Digital extremes ltd

I want to be civil about this, but what the Hell, Rob?

Firstly, 'potential' damage, i.e. speculative damage, will get DE nowhere in a hearing. You can't just wildly speculate on what damages you could have or might have suffered, nor can you simply assert without evidence that you would have made enormous amounts of money from your, again, free to play quest, had someone not leaked a script.

Secondly, I'm glad we agree that these damages are 'immeasurable' - as in, completely improvable, impossible to measure, utterly intangible. How are DE going to demonstrate the number of people who even read the leaked script? How do you then determine who read that leaked script and...again seriously what financial damages are there regarding freely provided content?

No, really; how would DE demonstrate 'potential' damage based on an alternate timeline to a court?

Quote

But it could not be imperatively stated that the data mines did not cause any damages.

Seriously, what is this? Do you really want to condemn the extreme bias of others when you've written this just after asserting the notion of "potentially immeasurable damage" from DE's perspective? Either this is something that can be investigated and quantified or it can't, you can't boldly state immeasurable damages then with a straight-face claim no one can definitely prove no damages were suffered. Digital Extremes better hope they can find a way to measure it if they want to keep threatening a teenager with legal action, I'll say that much.

 

Quote

To be honest DE's legal team has been lean on Void_glitch.

Considering that he's a minor, has yet to even be clearly accused of a crime - or rather, an activity that's actually illegal, and not explicitly protected under fair use by clear case law in the country it was performed - and yet has been threatened with, as you put it, having his entire life, and the lives of his family ruined...no. Again, hard to be civil and take your comments on bias seriously when you write stuff like this. He's a teenager, there are people his age that receive not only lighter sentencing but entirely commuted sentencing for crimes involving violence.

You want me to believe that financially ruining him and his family, with possible jail time, depending on whatever charges they want to eventually decide on, because he posted loot tables and a script that Digital Extremes made available client side on every computer with Warframe installed? Because we really do need to address that: Void_Glitch can only datamine what DE put on his computer. If I'm making a movie and the leaking of the script could ruin it and cause huge financial damages, I don't know about you, but if it was that important, I probably wouldn't send thousands and thousands of copies of the early script out, nor do I really think you can claim something is private, let alone secret, if you install it on that many people's computers. 

Quote

Void_gltich has caused irreparable damage to Digital Extremes and its Parent through the datamines. I would summarise without detail as many as I can below.

I can summarise this with even less detail: purely speculative notions of what amounts to an alternate universe. Again, how would you even measure 'less new players' because of a Baro leak? How would you demonstrate a sizeable number of people specifically didn't log in because of a leak? So, they would have been excited, but it was announced early, and they weren't excited, but they definitely would have been excited a bit later? This reminds me of the 'lost sales' argument, commonly rebutted by pointing out that you can't use speculative future sales you pull out of nowhere to determine damages, otherwise I could project 1 billion new players when determining financial loss.

I'm going to wrap this up here, but I do have one more point to make:

Rob, I'm not sure why you've tried to do this in such an arrogant manner, as if you alone are the voice of reason, even going so far as to assert your fellow YouTubers are 'without morals', acting as if you can discuss a really quite complex case with such certainty and, again, 'spill tea' - but you really can't. I can't either, I'm not more an expert in this complex area of law than you are. Well, maybe I am, because I do know one thing you apparently don't, as it's very, very relevant, far more so than other things you've mentioned, yet you haven't even brought it up in passing:

Quote

Canada's criminal code

I'm glad you recognise the relevance of Canada's laws here, of course, as the copyright owners are based in Canada, but that's kind of the issue I have the way you've gone about this, not just here but elsewhere.

Canada's copyright law doesn't use 'Fair Use' Rob, the Fair Use defense does not exist in Canada, they instead use Fair Dealing, a similar sounding but rather different defense, altogether far more lenient than Fair Use, including the uses of 'research' and 'reporting', both highly relevant to this case.

I find it odd that you've never mentioned this once, and I find it odd that you're not aware that Fair Use is only relevant to the US side of this debate, if it even ends up being relevant at all, depending on how this proceeds as, again, the copyright holders and their intellectual property are based in Canada. I find it especially odd because you say you're more versed in 'English law' - but England and Wales also use Fair Dealing, albeit another variation, rather than Fair Use. 

Again, I'm far from an expert in this area of law, and I can't tell anyone exactly what the future will hold, and I could be just as wrong as Rob has been in places, especially when it remains to be seen where or how a trial of a minor across borders would even proceed, but again, my real issue is that on social media especially, you've acted as if you're the expert, surrounded by idiots, and you have an obligation to 'educate' us. 

You don't, and the last thing we need is a post that mixes the genuine law with wild speculation and hyperbole, to form a manipulative half-truth that presumes guilt.

[KettleTicket]

22 hours ago, yingji said:

Talk to lawyer don't be influenced by stuff posted on Internet forum of other party and written by god(tm)-knows-who.

Really. Lawyer. They are counting on you messing up. Don't.

A 17 year old. afford a lawyer. ha. Consultation fees are ridiculous (300 USD per hour in most scenarios).

 

personal opinion: I liked the viewing the mission decks to find out "where is the best place to obtain Relic ___?"
I only remember the best places to farm Meso & Axi relics right now, which will undoubtedly change when the next major update drops.

I am guilty of looking at VoiD's languages.json dump and putting the future item info on the proper wiki articles as hidden text (<!-- text -->) until time of release -- the last one I added was twitch prime syandana 3 weeks before Prime Time 170. Not many people look at "diff"s or edit an article in "source", so I figure it's "mostly safe".

Publishing your tables for the community to see would be great. Click a relic in codex, see where it drops and what percentage chance to drop. Still would prefer independent confirmation of percentages (due to the whole "Chesa" fiasco), but I'll take what I can get.

EDIT: As for the Sortie rewards being color-coded, it does not state that Shotgun Rivens have a significantly lower drop rate than Rifle and Pistol Rivens. While the chance to obtain a Riven Mod is roughly 20%, Pistol RMs are 1.04% more likely than Rifle RMs... and Rifle RMs are 7% more likely than Shotgun RMs. (Pulled from wiki/Sortie#Rewards)

Edited June 25, 2017 by KettleTicket
besides Chesa, there is the current matter of Riven Mod drop rates

[atom]

4 hours ago, Mak_Gohae said:

I understand min/maxing but the questions are, cant you mix/max with the numbers available? Why dont you just politely ask for more numbers? Why do you need to hack the game to get these numbers and act like this is needed to play the game? 

The numbers people want every number that exist in the game and if DE doesnt provide it yesterday DE is some super evil monsters. 

I understand that this is how some people play the game but you folks need to understand that this is not required info the game makers need to give you. 

This is what i wrote. 

Is it enough to mod for crit for a weapon with meh crit?

I am clearly asking if the bonus is helpful for certain weapons. Tell me how this is applied, i asked a question i didnt make a statement. 

1. players have been politely asking for those things for years! this data is needed to play the game the way we like to. knowing how to achieve maximum potential.

2. data mining is not hacking.

3. "meh crit" is a statement and it shows you don't have a grasp on stats and modding because 15% crit on a longsword is not meh! i already said it's crit viable in my previous reply.

4. seems to me you were given answers and arguments time and time again yet you keep asking the same questions. i don't want to be mean maybe english is not your native language (it's not mine either) but i honestly don't know how to make it clearer for you if you still don't get it.

[Cyandana]

 

20 hours ago, MortalMercenary said:

The issue with melee range is that it can vary because of different stances and different swings, although we could have a range for the values, like 10m-15m as the listed range.

Honestly when it comes to drop rates right now I do not think DE can get away with just posting the stats in game or on their own website while maintaining 100% trust with the community after this whole event with Void.

Also when it comes to the wiki it relies on data mines for some of its values and I for one will not believe any of its values when Harrow drops next week and will find it hard to continue to trust DE based on how I have seen this whole situation unravel.

I can almost guarantee you that melee range isn't provided because they recorded the stances with motion capture. They probably don't have easily editable variables to change the range of a melee swings (which is horrible implementation practice, from a programming perspective) . Meaning they tied "Hitbox" data directly to animation.

If my memory serves, we have seldom if ever had a " range " adjustment to any stance, only damage changes. 

All speculation though :) 

[GhostLacuna]

5 minutes ago, Cyandana said:

 

I can almost guarantee you that melee range isn't provided because they recorded the stances with motion capture. They probably don't have easily editable variables to change the range of a melee swings (which is horrible implementation practice, from a programming perspective) . Meaning they tied "Hitbox" data directly to animation.

If my memory serves, we have seldom if ever had a " range " adjustment to any stance, only damage changes. 

All speculation though :) 

range has been verified on quick melee mostly. Some stance work has been done.

you can test this yourself by going a distance from any none opened chest and then mark it with G to get the distance. the start swinging and slowly move forward. 

You will both see "sparks" where your attacks hit and when you come close enough your attack will open the chest. 

note that both reach and primed reach increase both ends of an weapon. due to this fact orthos prime with primed reach has a much much larger hitbox then the texture while galatine prime actually have its hitbox a bit lower on the blade. 

so not quite tied to animation. 

been a few patches since i last did tests so for some newer weapons i dont know how large the hitbox really is. 

[shadrad]

On 6/23/2017 at 6:45 PM, sinisteran said:

(snip)

 

England, US, and Canada are all part of the Berne Convention IIRC, so the creator's Right to Reproduction should be more or less on similar grounds.

[Me.KayOh]

8 hours ago, notlamprey said:

The bottom line here for me is that what @(PS4)VoiD_Glitch did may be construed as morally wrong, but it was by no definition illegal. Full stop.

DE is coming after him on legal grounds, which means that their argument is weak.

Please, DE. Reconsider your position on this.

They dont need to reconsider their position if they have solid evidence of their policies/laws being violated. evidence which probably has not been made public and is exempt from every public discussion concerning this. perhaps something your dear void_glitch is also omitting to speak of. who knows?

and hypothetically, if they are moving forward with litigation on the basis of this evidence, then their argument is by no means weak.

Edited June 25, 2017 by Church002

[DawnFalcon]

Ah, so when they sue for i.e. discord overlays, as clearly it's a violation of the EULA and something easy to prove... ...let alone mouse macros...

They don't need to consider this stuff being an issue, of course, you say. And sueing people is always based on strong evidence, right. Well.

Edited June 25, 2017 by DawnFalcon

[sinisteran]

On 25/06/2017 at 6:32 AM, Spooky_Shuck said:

I have never used these forums to post before, so apologies if I somehow screw up the formatting. There's a few things I'd like to address in Rob's post, but before I do, I'd like to state that just because you agree with Rob or myself, this doesn't mean that facts have suddenly been posted. This is a fairly complex case in an area of law that is still developing and often relies on archaic legislation never intended for this electronic era. This is just interpretation of the little information DE have given Void_Glitch and the community with regards to their threat of legal action. 

To put this as politely as I can, however; I am unsure how you can carry yourself in this discussion so arrogantly, as if you are dropping truth bombs, or whatever 'spilling tea' means, when you've really not demonstrated the comprehensive knowledge you'd need to back up such a self-assured tone.

In my opinion, Rob is partially correct here, in that the artwork is naturally DE's intellectual property. However, I am unsure as to how he has assumed that simply posting artwork in itself would constitute as copyright infringement worthy of prosecution in the courts. Rob, to his credit, discussed this a little later on, but to reiterate with my own opinion;

I can post that artwork myself right here, if I wished, and unless I attempted to pass said work off as my own, attempted to profit from that artwork - the usual pitfalls - you'd be unlikely to find a court that would think such a matter was worth prosecution and punishment. It's a little tricky to discuss this with certainty, however, as this is one area of copyright law that has to be reasonably interpreted; posting an image of a mod is unlikely to get anywhere in court, but a wholesale rip of all the games artwork would be another story. It's one of those areas that has to be judged by the idea of 'common sense' - if I quote Einstein, you'd have a hard time pressing charges against me, but if I replicated all his written works and posted them here, his estate would have a case on their hands. 

Rob's list of leaks mostly doesn't seem to relate to intellectual property any more than it does announcements and so on, however. It's hard to gauge exactly how much artwork and so on was leaked. The script would be the most damning, certainly, but that was many years ago, and DE will have a hard time explaining why, if that was so damaging, they waited so long to press charges, and how they only seem to have gone from strength to strength financially afterwards regardless.

Ultimately, in my opinion, then, this would come down to whether Digital Extremes can present a case based on damages suffered. I'll discuss that in more detail below, but so far, I feel this is an academic point at best; I can't imagine many prosecutors, let alone judges, would find it in the public interest to press charges against a foreign teenager for posting images that he in no way attempted to take credit for, or profit from. 

I don't really have much to say with regards to the EULA, as it's largely irrelevant. Digital Extremes have every right to ban whoever they see fit, but a license agreement is not a legally binding document that decides the law of the land as it sees fit. Any actual crimes mentioned within the EULA are already crimes, and simply disallowing something in such an agreement does not make it necessarily illegal in court - as again, this isn't a binding contract between companies, or a failure to provide an agreed upon product or service, it amounts to 'no cheating or we'll ban you'. If I fill trade chat with endless spam, they can ban me, but that doesn't mean they can sue me. So, yes, they can do whatever they like to Void_Glitch's account, but that's not usually relevant to a court case. There's little a EULA contributes as the law itself already determines lawful or unlawful acts.

That said, whilst I disagree with the above, this was mostly fine. Again, these parts come down to interpretation in large part. However, a great deal of Rob's post was not only arrogant, and extremely hyperbolic, but misinformed and misleading - arguably manipulative, as well. 

This is outright, demonstrably false - at least, under US law, in this context. Rob's language is a little inconsistent here, as he first says breach of contract, but then discusses the crime of hacking. I'm going to assume, given the matter at hand, though, that Rob is asserting that reverse engineering is in some way an illicit violation of Digital Extreme's property. Again, this is not true in general, barring specifically protected exemptions, but in the US it is even a positive right.

Cases like Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. v. Connectix Corp. (2000) have very clearly affirmed the legal right to datamine, examine the interior code of a product, and then recreate your own with whatever knowledge you gleam. In other words, simply copy-pasting or otherwise replicating the exact code is naturally theft, but otherwise, even reverse engineering is considered fair use. In the US there is clear precedent permitting the cracking and examination of software and even using what you've learned to make your own product, as long as it is truly yours and not a one-to-one replication.  

Here's a very brief excerpt from copyright.gov:

The court concluded that the intermediate copies Connectix made and used during the course of its reverse engineering of the BIOS program were protected fair use, necessary to permit Connectix to make its non-infringing Virtual Game Station function with PlayStation games.

 This court's ruling was in part made in itself based on a preceding ruling by a considerably older but very similar case: Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc. (1992) - this precedent was set by the appellate courts and the supreme court declined to further deliberate on the matter. As far as precedent goes, in the US, when it comes to code, reverse engineering is entirely protected. There really isn't much else to say here: either Rob was asserting that this process is illegal, which it simply isn't, or he was just discussing the EULA still...which wouldn't make any sense given the rest of the paragraph and would be a moot point anyway.

As I've said, if you're simply basing this on datamining and reverse engineering, then this is again, entirely false, but more importantly;

I find the way you wrote this to be extremely odd, if not manipulative. Void_Glitch is, currently, by law, not liable for anything at all. As in, he has not even been charged. You speak of overwhelming bias, yet have written this as if his guilt is presumed and he must work to disprove DE's vague assertions. You know full well Void_Glitch's innocence is presumed and that DE must work to establish damages suffered etc. in a hearing, before Void_Glitch even needs to consider defending himself. 

Digital Extremes must provide very clear evidence that they suffered real damages as a result of...well, what exactly? People knowing Primed Streamline exists? With the same artwork as the non-Primed version? The hacking of a skin that is now years old and the Chinese already had access to? 

Well, good luck proving that that somehow caused untold financial damages, in a free to play game where the content in itself is offered free of charge. Unless Primed Streamline was going to be sold, that's not even in question, and I'm not sure how you can 'spoil' the existence of something that's already been publicly released for years elsewhere in the world. Given that very small percentages of a free to play game's population spend real money on the game, the oft-dubbed 'whales' of free to play games, this becomes even more nebulous. 

I want to be civil about this, but what the Hell, Rob?

Firstly, 'potential' damage, i.e. speculative damage, will get DE nowhere in a hearing. You can't just wildly speculate on what damages you could have or might have suffered, nor can you simply assert without evidence that you would have made enormous amounts of money from your, again, free to play quest, had someone not leaked a script.

Secondly, I'm glad we agree that these damages are 'immeasurable' - as in, completely improvable, impossible to measure, utterly intangible. How are DE going to demonstrate the number of people who even read the leaked script? How do you then determine who read that leaked script and...again seriously what financial damages are there regarding freely provided content?

No, really; how would DE demonstrate 'potential' damage based on an alternate timeline to a court?

Seriously, what is this? Do you really want to condemn the extreme bias of others when you've written this just after asserting the notion of "potentially immeasurable damage" from DE's perspective? Either this is something that can be investigated and quantified or it can't, you can't boldly state immeasurable damages then with a straight-face claim no one can definitely prove no damages were suffered. Digital Extremes better hope they can find a way to measure it if they want to keep threatening a teenager with legal action, I'll say that much.

Considering that he's a minor, has yet to even be clearly accused of a crime - or rather, an activity that's actually illegal, and not explicitly protected under fair use by clear case law in the country it was performed - and yet has been threatened with, as you put it, having his entire life, and the lives of his family ruined...no. Again, hard to be civil and take your comments on bias seriously when you write stuff like this. He's a teenager, there are people his age that receive not only lighter sentencing but entirely commuted sentencing for crimes involving violence.

You want me to believe that financially ruining him and his family, with possible jail time, depending on whatever charges they want to eventually decide on, because he posted loot tables and a script that Digital Extremes made available client side on every computer with Warframe installed? Because we really do need to address that: Void_Glitch can only datamine what DE put on his computer. If I'm making a movie and the leaking of the script could ruin it and cause huge financial damages, I don't know about you, but if it was that important, I probably wouldn't send thousands and thousands of copies of the early script out, nor do I really think you can claim something is private, let alone secret, if you install it on that many people's computers. 

I can summarise this with even less detail: purely speculative notions of what amounts to an alternate universe. Again, how would you even measure 'less new players' because of a Baro leak? How would you demonstrate a sizeable number of people specifically didn't log in because of a leak? So, they would have been excited, but it was announced early, and they weren't excited, but they definitely would have been excited a bit later? This reminds me of the 'lost sales' argument, commonly rebutted by pointing out that you can't use speculative future sales you pull out of nowhere to determine damages, otherwise I could project 1 billion new players when determining financial loss.

I'm going to wrap this up here, but I do have one more point to make:

Rob, I'm not sure why you've tried to do this in such an arrogant manner, as if you alone are the voice of reason, even going so far as to assert your fellow YouTubers are 'without morals', acting as if you can discuss a really quite complex case with such certainty and, again, 'spill tea' - but you really can't. I can't either, I'm not more an expert in this complex area of law than you are. Well, maybe I am, because I do know one thing you apparently don't, as it's very, very relevant, far more so than other things you've mentioned, yet you haven't even brought it up in passing:

I'm glad you recognise the relevance of Canada's laws here, of course, as the copyright owners are based in Canada, but that's kind of the issue I have the way you've gone about this, not just here but elsewhere.

Canada's copyright law doesn't use 'Fair Use' Rob, the Fair Use defense does not exist in Canada, they instead use Fair Dealing, a similar sounding but rather different defense, altogether far more lenient than Fair Use, including the uses of 'research' and 'reporting', both highly relevant to this case.

I find it odd that you've never mentioned this once, and I find it odd that you're not aware that Fair Use is only relevant to the US side of this debate, if it even ends up being relevant at all, depending on how this proceeds as, again, the copyright holders and their intellectual property are based in Canada. I find it especially odd because you say you're more versed in 'English law' - but England and Wales also use Fair Dealing, albeit another variation, rather than Fair Use. 

Again, I'm far from an expert in this area of law, and I can't tell anyone exactly what the future will hold, and I could be just as wrong as Rob has been in places, especially when it remains to be seen where or how a trial of a minor across borders would even proceed, but again, my real issue is that on social media especially, you've acted as if you're the expert, surrounded by idiots, and you have an obligation to 'educate' us. 

You don't, and the last thing we need is a post that mixes the genuine law with wild speculation and hyperbole, to form a manipulative half-truth that presumes guilt.

1. I am not Rob. He happened to just pick up my article and retweet it.

2. The artwork I am mainly talking about isnt things that were supposed to be in the public domain or yet. Throughout the years many unreleased weapons artworks have been released through the mines. Honestly to my mistake I cannot remember the top of my head the prisma weapons that were once mined but never released. I think Prisma Orthos was one of them. Images that are not released officially by DE and pulled out of their systems still fall under the copyright of DE. and posting them is against the law. There are many examples of this happening. Practically every prime access and baro visit.

3.Quoting Einstein is completely different from the situation we are discussing and it is not a fair example. I think a closer example would be posting a piece of art you made on my facebook/ reddit without explicit permission. Even if the world knows you made it. It is still not fair use because you didnt want that picture to be seen in the first place nor did I get permisson.

4.I actually agree with the point why it took DE to act so long. They said the last straw was Umbra and that was a week or two ago so i think pursuing now is reasonable. Also Void has been contacted by DE Drew I think? To stop what he is doing but he refused. Taking Umbra's hack aside the statute of limitations is not a few months or 1 year. In Canada for serious offences it could be up to 20 years. Uk is defined by limitation act and ranges from 1 year to unlimited. USA depends but I think civil prosecution is 3 years as stated in the U.S. Code Title 17 Chapter 5 § 507. Secondly creating a suit takes time and resources, DE would potentially need to talk to their chinese parent company, wait for their response and then talk to their lawyers before they could do anything. Perhaps DE is not building a suit toward Void if he complies. A C&D isn't a lawsuit.

4. Yes the EULA thing is correct, it is not law by the agreement we signed. DE can do whatever the hell they want with their game since all we have is a license to use it. they could ban us both without reason if desired. I was not being manipulative. Manipulation means controlling someone or something to your own advantage, often unfairly or dishonestly: But then you said what I said was I quote 'mostly fine' so how I am being manipulative and also if it's down to personal interpretation how could I be misinformed and incorrect when all I did was copy and paste parts of the Eula.

5. I did say in the start and in the TLDR that data mining under fair use is 100 percent fine and I don't think tis fair that you purposely left it out, especially when it was the first line of my text. I Also stated Void is not directly responsible for the Umbra hack. But he is also not 100 percent innocent unless he can 100 percent prove the datamine did not in anyway assist the hackers in doing it. DE stated that they could prove his mines were involved.

Secondly I agree my wording could be improved when is said breach of contract what I meant was a breach of Eula. Which is also an contract. EULA's are not always legally binding. When you tick that box and if it states specifically in the EULA that by clicking you accept everything in it. It is. In ProCD v. Zeidenberg, the license was ruled enforceable because it was necessary for the customer to assent to the terms of the agreement by clicking on an "I Agree" button in order to install the software. In Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp., however, the licensee was able to download and install the software without first being required to review and positively assent to the terms of the agreement, and so the license was held to be unenforceable. Because Zeidenberg had no choice but to click Accept on the EULA before using the product, then it is a valid legal contract. However Specht was able to use the software without first agreeing to the EULA, and thus the EULA is not legally binding. I also found out that if a minor child clicks Accept on an EULA and then does something to violate the terms, the parent or legal guardian then takes full responsibility. Actually I was wrong...and I apologise. Void should not be the one in trouble or liable. But his parents should be.

6. Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. v. Connectix Corp. Is not relevant. Like I said several times within my argument which you  purposefully or accidently missed. Data Mining stuff that is under fair use is 100 percent fine. I have stated that many times but what's not fine is released pics, scripts. etc. My written work is mine. If you copied my college essay without my permission I could sue you.

7. Again I am not talking about Void as the hacker but within the chain of causation

8. Actually I agree with this. EVen though my plan was not to incriminate him the lettering I use was certainly bad and potentially bias and I apologize. I should have used X instead since in context this was an example and not an accusation. Perhaps you misread the context of this and I am sorry.

9. You used the weakest example I made to talk about damages and also the one which was not in my main paragraph so it makes me feel that you cant argue about the script leak. I mainly asserted about War within. Let me break it down further and more simple. Script gets hacked. Player reads it, disappointed, CBF to return to the game = a potential loss in platinum sale. OR New prime access leaked. Players not hyped CBF to buy plat to trade for it with players. OR rich person interested in game- see script, no longer interested in buying plat to get good stuff or to level mastery faster. - can you say with 100 percent no one fits in these 3 categories? Even if there is only 3 people that had intended to do this, that's 3 sales. I could think of a few more but I don't think those are reasonable enough so I wont bother.

10. Yes. Speculative damage on a free to play game that most happen to spend money on.- just read number 9 again. Also I should have just used damages and not enormous, even i remember from law school those words are a no no. So thanks for reminding me and sorry for using them.

11. Ah. Alternative timeline huh? The get Volt to run very very fast and go into the speedforce and to the other timeline to find out!  JKJK The damages could be calculated actually. Profits in this case doesn't matter because void glitch probably made 0 from this. Actual Damages however is also known as compensatory damages,consists of the amount of any demonstrable loss the owner suffered as a result of the infringing activity. This loss may be from lost sales, lost licensing revenue, or any other provable financial loss directly attributable to the infringement.
Federal law 17 U.S.C. § 504(b) "The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer’s profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer’s gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work."

So I guess what DE would do is show the difference in growth after the second dream to the War Within (which was leaked) and also Octavias anthem ( script not leaked) as well as the number of sales loss of a datamined prime and a non datamined prime taking away inflation, product growth, exposure. ETC ANy accountants here?

12. I explained above. He wont be personally liable since its not murder or battery something like that but his parents would be liable to pay the damages.- I agree this is BS but thats how it works. Stolen movies for example...Parents pay the damages to the studio.

13. DE has no plans to sue the kid. Its bad business unless hes secretly Bill Gates son in which I immediately change my argument and F*** DE! Yah you guys are wrong. But this is more of a warning. Its a C&D...They want him to stop because it has lead to damages in their revenue stream. I am sure if Voids actions was making them money this would be ignored. But potentially the games security was compromised...and well I am sorry but I think I agree with DE on this one. Vacuum tho? F*** that S#&amp;&#036;. I want it inert. I really do personally see it this time that DE was not at fault.

14. Again. Read above of calculating damages. But I do think my example wasnt very good. But I'll simplify it yet again. Less players login= less exposure= less potential new player= less growth + sales.
 

15. Sorry for sounding aggressive and arrogant. But again I am not Rob. My article merely got picked up by him and I think its quite unfair of you to make a assertion without proper research. I think your judgement may be clouded since it seems like you are not the biggest fan of his. And neither am I. But this time I really do stand with DE. They are trying to protect their baby and I think they are doing the right thing. Oh and concerning the fair dealing bit. It was a really good pull because I honestly forgot about it.

EDIT: By the way Spooky if you want to edit your post to make yourself not look like an idiot. Dont just change the first few sentences so it makes it look like you are talking SINISTERAN AND referencing ROB AKA @Operative_Shift Atleast change the whole damn thing. I even bolded a few you missed where you referenced me (Sinsteran) as Rob speaking in context to my post as his (Rob's) Post

Edited June 26, 2017 by sinisteran

[atom]

1 hour ago, sinisteran said:

5. I did say in the start and in the TLDR that data mining under fair use is 100 percent fine and I don't think tis fair that you purposely left it out, especially when it was the first line of my text. I Also stated Void is not directly responsible for the Umbra hack. But he is also not 100 percent innocent unless he can 100 percent prove the datamine did not in anyway assist the hackers in doing it. DE stated that they could prove his mines were involved.

9. You used the weakest example I made to talk about damages and also the one which was not in my main paragraph so it makes me feel that you cant argue about the script leak. I mainly asserted about War within. Let me break it down further and more simple. Script gets hacked. Player reads it, disappointed, CBF to return to the game = a potential loss in platinum sale. OR New prime access leaked. Players not hyped CBF to buy plat to trade for it with players. OR rich person interested in game- see script, no longer interested in buying plat to get good stuff or to level mastery faster. - can you say with 100 percent no one fits in these 3 categories? Even if there is only 3 people that had intended to do this, that's 3 sales. I could think of a few more but I don't think those are reasonable enough so I wont bother.

Federal law 17 U.S.C. § 504(b) "The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer’s profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer’s gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work."

So I guess what DE would do is show the difference in growth after the second dream to the War Within (which was leaked) and also Octavias anthem ( script not leaked) as well as the number of sales loss of a datamined prime and a non datamined prime taking away inflation, product growth, exposure. ETC ANy accountants here?

12. I explained above. He wont be personally liable since its not murder or battery something like that but his parents would be liable to pay the damages.- I agree this is BS but thats how it works. Stolen movies for example...Parents pay the damages to the studio.

13. DE has no plans to sue the kid. Its bad business unless hes secretly Bill Gates son in which I immediately change my argument and F*** DE! Yah you guys are wrong. But this is more of a warning. Its a C&D...They want him to stop because it has lead to damages in their revenue stream. I am sure if Voids actions was making them money this would be ignored. But potentially the games security was compromised...and well I am sorry but I think I agree with DE on this one. Vacuum tho? F*** that S#&amp;&#036;. I want it inert. I really do personally see it this time that DE was not at fault.

5, you seem to know what you are talking about but afaik DE didn't exactly say they have proof. for all we know their "evidence" is that one reddit post in which Void claims to know how the hack was done after the fact, but doesn't want to share the info for security purposes (clearly with the intention of keeping DE from harm). that doesn't mean he's involved.

also i don't think he has to prove anything as it is DE that has the burden of proof in this case. am i wrong?

9. i can argue that any leak actually builds hype and results in boosted sales unless the quality is low in which case a leak can help them remedy the situation and release a better product. afaik they are selling a long term service here it's in DE's best interest to sell high quality so they have returning customers. i'm pretty sure TWW resulted in better sales despite being leaked when compared to octavia's anthem

i can also argue that taking legal action against an innocent teenager (if he wasn't involved in the hack) that has helped the community and ultimately DE to such an extent and therefore losing the respect and dedication of the playerbase can indeed lead to revenue loss.

[sinisteran]

2 minutes ago, ..atom.. said:

5, you seem to know what you are talking about but afaik DE didn't exactly say they have proof. for all we know their "evidence" is that one reddit post in which Void claims to know how the hack was done after the fact, but doesn't want to share the info for security purposes (clearly with the intention of keeping DE from harm). that doesn't mean he's involved.

also i don't think he has to prove anything as it is DE that has the burden of proof in this case. am i wrong?

9. i can argue that any leak actually builds hype and results in boosted sales unless the quality is low in which case a leak can help them remedy the situation and release a better product. afaik they are selling a long term service here it's in DE's best interest to sell high quality so they have returning customers. i'm pretty sure TWW resulted in better sales despite being leaked when compared to octavia's anthem

i can also argue that taking legal action against an innocent teenager (if he wasn't involved in the hack) that has helped the community and ultimately DE to such an extent and therefore losing the respect and dedication of the playerbase can indeed lead to revenue loss.

If DE didnt have actual proof. They wont say anything. This is a multi million company and not some child in a playground.

the probem is the scripts and mines werent final. So they arent the final form and is subject to changes. Ppl seeing this would get the wrong perception and judge preemptively. When the final product could be massively better.

[atom]

56 minutes ago, sinisteran said:

If DE didnt have actual proof. They wont say anything. This is a multi million company and not some child in a playground.

the probem is the scripts and mines werent final. So they arent the final form and is subject to changes. Ppl seeing this would get the wrong perception and judge preemptively. When the final product could be massively better.

maybe they have proof maybe this is just a scare tactic to ensure there are no leaks prior to TennoCon ... multi million companies make mistakes like the rest of us.

edit: i absolutely understand why DE doesn't want 3rd party unauthorised leaked scripts and artwork. i think in truth any dedicated player feels the same. maybe there's a better way to get there through more peaceful channels than "talk to my lawyer". obviously there can always be unwilling parties but i don't think Void_Glitch is that as he seemed willing to discuss the matter with DE staff in a cooperative stance.

the whole game is subject to change even officially released stuff. it's still beta.

edit: ppl seeing this could potentially get the wrong perception and judge preemptively. is that considered proof of revenue loss?

Edited June 25, 2017 by ..atom..

[Sasquatchias]

Not to say I don't trust DE, but I don't trust DE on this particular matter given what has happened in the past in regards to matters like this, from outright incorrect information on locations to farm for items (which kudos to them they DID go and correct when pointed out, but why that happened in the first place is a goddamn mystery), to denials about drop rates being borked (such as Chesa Kubrows not dropping upon launch from Alerts), and what I view as the outright malicious situation regarding old Prime Parts in the Void where they had absurdly low drop rates and upon being called out on it after people saw the correct values DE's response was to make it harder to get that sort of information.

 

Now I'm not going to go into particulars or finger pointing about the current situation regarding Void vs DE (I made my stance perfectly clear in an earlier post in the Datamine megathread), but I strongly urge DE to seriously consider getting in a third party that can independently verify all the information they plan to add in to gain a bit more trust back from the community (or at least the portion who cares about this stuff), and to calm mine and other's potential fears about DE saying one thing and the opposite being true like what has happened in the past.

[Mak_Gohae]

6 hours ago, GhostLacuna said:

Oh I don’t know perhaps I take a whip put on primed reach and enjoy the 10 meter range on every single hit.

Or I could pick orthos prime as a melee weapon and know each and every quick melee attack is 10 meters wide and will hit entire groups at once.

Range on a melee weapon is a very very important stat

So what you are telling me here is that you do not need to know the weapon range stat cause you answer is, "Put range in a melee to get range."

Yeah, everyone knows that. Is there a weapon where putting range doesnt give you range?

6 hours ago, GhostLacuna said:

10% crit on may seem low when you look at it on a glance but if you hit 6-8 enemies at a time that 15% crit chance has a much larger chance to trigger then say a weapon that have a 20% crit chance but can only reach 1 meter and hit one enemy at a time.

Or I could make real uses of the mod sustem and slot of maiming strike for a total of 100% crit chance on every slide attack.

Every 10 meter 360 degree slide attack I might add.

this about exalted blade which you state doesnt actually use the weapon stat. So my has no answer cause weapon crit is meaninless

6 hours ago, GhostLacuna said:

The short answer is all of them need their information shown.

But as you brought up one of the best examples of why lets explain why the secondary stats on sonicor is important.

The primary firemode deal 150 impact no crit no status nothing.  Trash tier gun according to stats

But wait you deal far more damage when you miss your intended target and hit the floor or a wall close to them.  And ¼ of the time you fling them all around.

Not to mention if you managed to kill them with a missed shot ohh then we are talking about a tenno space program.

What you fail to realize is that the best crowd control secondary in the game does not show the player ingame what it can actually do.

Now that base 25% status on the secondary fire

Mean that it has a ~46% chance to trigger with only barrel diffusion

Add Lethal turrent and we sit at 55% status proc chance

Now lets add blast

Now that is fire and cold

Cold we can use frostbite  so 76% proc chance

Wait secondaries have a primed fire mod perfect lets add that

So 1108 blast damage within 5 meters of the projectile.

Nice but we can do better

We already used fire and cold so lets add electricity and toxin to the mix

Pistol pestilence give us 89% status

Jolt gives us 96.5% not quite 100% but good enough

Now we have a gun that deal

492 impact

1108 blast

591 corrosive

But wait didn’t we have impact specific mods that would work great on a 100% impact weapon?

Well yes we do.

So lets add pummel

The damage on the secondary fire mode is now

1084 impact

1108 blast

591 corrosive

96% of the time

 How does the primary fire mode look then?

2956 impact

3024 blast

1612 corrosive

That means that the target you shoot will get the primary fire modes damage.

While anything within 5 meters of your target will be hit by the secondary fire modes damage.

And that is one of the many answers to why secondary fire modes need to be shown ingame.

WHat you are telling here is that there are people that will look at a stat and not do further research? I mean, two seconds into watching some one use the sonicor will tell you that this stat does not represent the game.

I really hope people dont pick weapons like this.

7 hours ago, GhostLacuna said:

As for exalted abilities.

Lets just quickly go over them and why the information is needed.

Excalibur has exalted blade we know that.

Ok what affects that ability then?

First of is power strength, then the melee combo counter and then his passive.

So for maximum damage we want to use swords.

Ok Galatine prime it is.

Now how the heck should we mod this weapon for exalted blade?

First we need to know which mods work with it.

This is not shown ingame.

the video spotlight says your weapon effect EB but you later say that it doesnt, only the mods do. I guess they should clarify that.

7 hours ago, GhostLacuna said:

To the wiki we go.

Exalted Blade is also affected by equipped melee mods including:

1)    Base damage (e.g., Steel Charge), elemental damage, physical damage, faction damage, channeling(e.g., Life Strike), critical damage, critical chance, status chance, attack speed (e.g., Berserker), and range mods.

2)    Exalted Blade is not affected by the equipped melee weapon's stats, weapon augments (e.g., Justice Blades, Bright Purity), class-specific mods (e.g., Covert Lethality), or stat-modifying skins (e.g., Manticore).

So its not galatine prime itself that is important for exalted blades damage rather its mods.

is there no way to find this info out in the game by playing the game and seeing numbers?

7 hours ago, GhostLacuna said:

No I don’t think that since it took a while for us to figure out what was wrong with the chesa eggs and even if we complained about the archwing weapon parts it took them months to fix it and if I recall right it was by moving the parts to clan research and the syndicates.

And we have asked for the information for years.

Also you need a computer course if you think data mining client data that on your own harddrive count as hacking.

Modding tools use similar ways to look at data in local stored data.

Skyrim for example would never have been so popular without its modding tools and script extenders.

And yes I can look up every single items true stats in skyrim by those means.

Also there is multiple ways for Digital Extremes to stop and onstruct data mining and they know it.

Lax procedures like how they handle their language files is one of the reasons there could be any leaks at all.

Well the chesa eggs will take a while since they take a while to spawn.

Taking a long time to show numbers? Yeah, it's their game and they set the rules. People need to get this in their heads. You have to wait until they are ready.

BTW, saying they have lax measures doesnt mean it's ok to do it.

 

[Chipputer]

Looks like it's time to learn how to datamine the information for your own private use, then.

I knew people were going to say they don't trust DE's drop rates. This is a big waste of their time, posting rates anywhere on their own.

[Mak_Gohae]

5 hours ago, ..atom.. said:

1. players have been politely asking for those things for years! this data is needed to play the game the way we like to. knowing how to achieve maximum potential.

2. data mining is not hacking.

3. "meh crit" is a statement and it shows you don't have a grasp on stats and modding because 15% crit on a longsword is not meh! i already said it's crit viable in my previous reply.

4. seems to me you were given answers and arguments time and time again yet you keep asking the same questions. i don't want to be mean maybe english is not your native language (it's not mine either) but i honestly don't know how to make it clearer for you if you still don't get it.

1. Like i just said above, you are playing their game and you need to abide by their rules. You wanting to play the game like you like is not a good argument. They set the rules. Be friendly and give reasons and hope they see your side. Taking number they dont provide and then getting angry about it is not going to help in this situation.

2. It's not info they provide and you take.

3. Im pretty sure my question is clear in what i am asking. Dont know what exactly you are taking from it to translate to me saying 15% crit is bad.

Is it enough to mod for crit for a weapon with meh crit?

I am asking if the EB bonus, the 15%, will give you a wider range of weapons to use for you min/maxers. Does it mean that you can equip a weapon with meh crit. A weapon with meh crit. A WEAPON WITH MEH CRIT.

Is this the part that's confusing, somehow? I am asking if it's fine to use a weapon that doesnt have high crit but average (meh) crit.

Do you understand now? Cause i dont it can make it any clearer.

4. Not really, you guys keep answering by posting builds instead of saying why that info is essential.

Im trying to get you guys to create an actual argument thats not, "I want numbers cause i use numbers!" If this is all you got i can see why DE takes so long in giving numbers. Because they are not making Number Cruncher The Game, they are making Warframe.

 

 

[WhiteMarker]

19 minutes ago, Sasquatch180 said:

(such as Chesa Kubrows not dropping upon launch from Alerts)

What?

And I'm curious: Why do people think knowing the drop-rates helps in any way?
In the end it's just about probabilities. And people don't understand probabilities.

[Chipputer]

3 minutes ago, WhiteMarker said:

What?

And I'm curious: Why do people think knowing the drop-rates helps in any way?
In the end it's just about probabilities. And people don't understand probabilities.

I've been wondering this, myself. I mean, sure, it's nice to know that the item you want isn't a .00001% drop rate, but just because it says 10% doesn't guarantee that it's only going to take a maximum of 10 runs to get that item.

People don't seem to understand that each individual pull is its own instance.

RE: What?
Chesa Kubrows, upon release, only hatched from plat-purchased eggs. Somehow.

[WhiteMarker]

Just now, Chipputer said:

 

RE: What?
Chesa Kubrows, upon release, only hatched from plat-purchased eggs. Somehow.

I see. Thanks for that information

[RavingRoman]

2 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

it's nice to know that the item you want isn't a .00001% drop rate

Shouldn't wanting to know this be enough? No need to justify even further. Call it an assurance that it won't take you years to nab what you need. Also you can search around which place has the highest probability. It's all about knowing where to try to get things.

Edited June 25, 2017 by RavingRoman

[Silvus-Sol]

36 minutes ago, Sasquatch180 said:

Not to say I don't trust DE, but I don't trust DE...

I understand why, I really do. But I don't think they would try to trick us the very first time they decide to work with us on this, and post false droprates. So maybe we should cut them a little slack and give them the benefit of doubt, at least until the new system is in-game and we can see how it all works.

In other words, you're jumping the gun a bit. Give them a chance first, and if they fail or something shady happens, then call for 3rd party involvement.

Edited June 25, 2017 by Silvus-Sol

[Chipputer]

Just now, RavingRoman said:

Shouldn't knowing this be enough.

The problem is that it doesn't help you when it comes down to flat out RNG for what you get. The only items you can increase drop rates on are relic items. Aside from that it pretty much just comes down to, "this item has a marginally higher drop rate here so I guess we'll farm here instead of there."

What's going to happen is DE's going to post a 5% drop rate on an item that someone wants, they're not going to get it after 20 runs, then they're going to come to the forums complaining that the drop rates are lies and get mad when people tell them that it's still down to RNG. It already happens. It's going to be worse when people can throw DE published drop rates in their faces and accuse them of lying.

[WhiteMarker]

Just now, RavingRoman said:

Call it an assurance that it won't take you years to nab what you need.

But knowing about the probability wont get you that information.
Even if the probability is just 0.0000001%, you can still drop the item from the first run you do. And even if the probability is 10%, you could still farm for ages before dropping anything.

[RavingRoman]

RNG will always be RNG. But the point is, it will tell me I'm not digging in the wrong place

[Aurea_Hiigara]

ITT: Paranoia.