LABYRINTH ENCHANTS ARE RIGGED
" What was the previous time? Was it the ember box fiasco? Good times. "Dude he fucking said hotdog racist.
Like I can't even make this shit up." - gj 1.0.0 Forum Posters now have 50% less Critical Thinking skill per Patch |
![]() |
" Eh, I don't agree with how Wolf used "impossible" but with statistics "impossible" isn't really a bizarre term to throw around. Everybody involved just inserts "theoretically possible but practically..." before "impossible" and saves the time of saying/writing it. Obviously this is with events much, much more unlikely than this thread topic. "Dude he fucking said hotdog racist.
Like I can't even make this shit up." - gj 1.0.0 Forum Posters now have 50% less Critical Thinking skill per Patch |
![]() |
" Not sure how valid the listing is, but not counting the level 75 ones, there are 348ish (349?) listed here: http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/List_of_helmet_enchantment_mods Makes my eyes water trying to count those silly things. "The only legitimate use of a computer is to play games." - Eugene Jarvis
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 |
![]() |
" 1. Lol, nobody cares who you think should be allowed to post, and who should not. Gotta admit, tho, that your attitude shows a lot about yourself. :D 2. No u 3. Sooo, we're back to the you don't know how math works point. I'm not sure we're going anywhere with this... :/ So yeah, roll out random insults mate, keep'em comin! " Nah, it was some random ACT 4 SUCKS CUZ I RAN 2 ACT 4 MAPS, AND THEN I RAN 2 ACT 3 MAPS, AND I GOT DOUBLE THE DROPS, thus ACT 4 HAS 50% OF DROPS kind of thread. Fun stuff. But yeah, box threads are also fun! :D Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance. Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. Last edited by Perq#4049 on Mar 11, 2016, 2:42:27 AM
| |
So many nerd dicks colliding while being swung about.
But yeah if there's XXX possibilities but you get one of 5 results constantly for 110 runs, clearly there's no likelihood (see how i use probability-type phrases?!) of results being skewed on purpose. Feel free to math that while I go do something else. |
![]() |
"wat are you talking about? And worst change is putting almost all bosses in new version of maps into fucking small areas, where you can't kite well or dodge stuff. What a terrible idiot invented that I want say to him: dude flick you, seriously flick you very much.
|
![]() |
RIGGED BOYZ https://youtu.be/T9kygXtkh10?t=285
FeelsBadMan Remove MF from POE, make juiced map the new MF. |
![]() |
There are 345 possible enchantments, with many skills getting 3 enchantments each. So 3/345=1/115 chance of getting one of these per attempt.
There are 82 skills with 3 possible enchantments:
Spoiler
Ancestral Protector, Animate Weapon, Arc, Arctic Breath, Ball Lightning, Barrage, Blade Vortex, Bladefall, Blast Rain, Blink Arrow, Burning Arrow, Caustic Arrow, Chaos Golem, Cleave, Cold Snap, Contagion, Detonate Dead, Discharge, Dominating Blow, Double Strike, Dual Strike, Elemental Hit, Fire Nova Mine, Fireball, Fire Trap, Firestorm, Flame Golem, Flame Surge, Flame Totem, Flameblast, Flicker Strike, Freezing Pulse, Frenzy, Frost Bomb, Glacial Cascade, Glacial Hammer, Ground Slam, Heavy Strike, Ice Crash, Ice Golem, Ice Shot, Ice Spear, Ice Trap, Incinerate, Infernal Blow, Kinetic Blast, Leap Slam, Lightning Arrow, Lightning Strike, Lightning Tendrils, Lightning Trap, Lightning Warp, Magma Orb, Mirror Arrow, Molten Strike, Orb of Storms, Power Siphon, Puncture, Rain of Arrows, Raise Spectre, Raise Zombie, Righteous Fire, Searing Bond, Shield Charge, Shock Nova, Shrapnel Shot, Siege Ballista, Spark, Spectral Throw, Split Arrow, Static Strike, Stone Golem, Storm Call, Summon Raging Spirit, Summon Skeletons, Sunder, Sweep, Tornado Shot, Viper Strike, Wild Strike.
We can estimate the chance of 9 repeats of a single skill occurring over 110 attempts as 82*110!/(9!101!)*(1/115)^9*(114/115)^101 This estimates the odds of the OP situation at about .0045%. (The chance to 9-peat off skills with only two available enchantments is negligible.) That is very, very odd luck, but not impossible. It should happen once in about 22322 110-enchant trials. So not a "one in a billion" or even "one in a million," but one in about twenty thousand. Given the amount of enchantments being ran daily, it isn't impossible, but inevitable that something like this would happen eventually.
Spoiler
Not literally inevitable, I understand randomness too, kthx.
OP is in the "under 0.1%" luck club, though, and making a RNGesus weirdness thread seems fair to me, provided he retracts his ridiculous statement that things are rigged when we have GGG staff saying it's not. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Mar 11, 2016, 11:15:02 AM
|
![]() |
TL;DR-
I didn't get what I want so now I'm mad about it and I'm going to spout some random crap about how the randomness can't really be random because my random crap isn't the random crap that I want and there was no randomness about it. To all the girls in the red high-heeled shoes,
they took all our money and stole all our boos. They ain't got their cherries, but that's no sin, they still got the box the cherry came in! |
![]() |
You know, in programming, in order to make people feel like results are random for some cases we'll actually use structured randoms - there is a list of possible results, the random result is then temporarily removed from the list of possible results. Another concept occasionally used is excluding the current item from the possible list, if the previous structured random isn't used (I believe, though I easily may be mistaken, that this is done for chroms).
Humans, as a rule, are so bad at understanding true random probability due to innate draw to finding patterns in everything, that random systems have to employ these cheats sometimes to make them feel more random. In addition, pseudo-random number generators are inherently flawed in that their results are deterministic rather than truly random (pRNG is an evaluated algorithm, so if you know all of the variables, you can compute the result - this is, funny enough, an issue in information security that has resulted in approaching true random number generators using things like radioactive decay). Quite simply put, true random is hard for humans and computers, for different reasons. Remember, no matter what result you get on any repeated random event (specifically unweighted or close weights), the chance of that event happening in that same order every time approaches astronomically low as you add more repetitions (such as the exact order of enchants for 110 labyrinths). People will tend to just grasp the patterns they see. That said, as this IS programming...if multiple people are correlating that there are weird evidences of enchanting being weighted in some way, it probably would need dev attention, even if only to verify that it is actually working as intended. There could even be unexpected affects causing weighted results if there really is a problem, such as a problem with the RNG itself or even cosmic rays flipping a bit (outlandish sounding, sure...but it literally can happen); however, the plural of anecdote is not data - that is to say, one person reporting that they had bad results, or even several people saying they had bad results, is not evidence in and of itself. TL;DR: RNG can be hard (to understand and do), so collect data if you believe there to be an issue Last edited by Wruntjunior#1536 on Mar 11, 2016, 11:30:50 AM
|
![]() |