Why Witch loot drops suffer so badly - the stats:
For those saying we're not doing actual work, I've done a simple excel experiment to show his test is inconclusive. Since Cronk has request for a separate thread, I've placed it here http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/292376
Note I've used 97 test instead of 433 drops because I don't know the weightage that should be given to neutral drops as such have only used Cronk's last test which removes all neutrals. | |
I just want to point out that the sample size comments are BS. We do not know the standard deviation of the population (which assumes we are treating the entire data set like a die roll) so we have no idea what the value is. Also OP never stated a margin of error.
It would be correct to say it may not be a valid sample size to give a useful result. That dies not mean that it isn't. We could use the student's t distribution and figure out sample variance to get the standard deviation if I remember correctly. I am having trouble wrapping my head around what we would consider the expected value to be though. |
![]() |
" While we're at it, chi-square would be another thing to throw in. Though don't quote me on this because it's been a while since my community medicine classes. 1337 21gn17ur3
|
![]() |
In terms of uncovering and simulating the actual drop mechanics, what further information would be needed to replicate something like http://spf.50webs.com/dropsim.htm for PoE?
|
![]() |
LP, i think you're right. We agree his test is inconclusive and merely that. Perhaps some got a little too hawkish in their views given the way OP has responded.
" | |
" Thanks for the decent response panda, it's so refreshing I nearly fell off my chair in amazement! Well, there's lots to respond to, so let's get cracking >:) "The idea that weighted drop rates is not pure RNG reflects a misunderstanding of what an RNG is and how it works." It's not my misunderstanding, I'm fully aware. It's not me that shouts RNG IS RNG. I think this is where you misunderstood my reasoning for stating RNG is not RNG. You give some nice examples of various gambling methods, but can we try to keep on-topic for PoE as you'll encourage all and sundry to post their version of what 'it's like', many of which will be pure garbage posts. You suggest weapons muck the stats up, and I agree. We just agree from different positions. You think weapons are not class-related, where as I do. Adding weighting to weapons and having some classes with more weapons than others punishes those classes with less weapons as their other item drops are hindered by a larger proportion of weighted items which butt-in to the mechanic before they get a look in. Thanks for proving my data looks sound. Yes those stats are exactly what I would 'expect' the drops to be with the current system. Appalling isn't it. Now we can get on topic, do you agree or disagree that drops should be class-related? You say no, keep them level-related. Why? "Drops are already sufficient to get you through most or all of the game without trading" Which is why we have so many 'drops are crap' threads/posts, because there's a difference between 'sufficient' and 'enjoyable'. There's also a difference between 'enjoyable' and 'easy-peasy'. You are countering 'easy-peasy' with 'sufficient'. It's over-compensating. You then say it's better to have useless items of the right level rather than useful items of a lower level, which is not true. You yourself having, in the same sentence, stated that you will find 'sufficient' gear to get you through the gae, which means wearing some old stuff through higher levels. Heck, I'm still caning screens wearing level 3 Boots. That's the whole reason for the threads. Because I'd rather wear level 3 Boots than spend 50 skill points in Strength or Dex to wear what the RNG is providing. for your two points: 1) This implies that having lots of characters 'on the go' is a 'primary' game design. In that the design principles are being made with such people in mind first, rather than a solo play-through as the 'primary' design input. I think all non-MMO games should be designed from the solo definite outwards, rather than from the multi-tasker inwards. 2) It doesn't help you find things to help you trade. It helps you find vast quantities of completely useless items that no-one would look at rather than give the player plenty of 'excitement' moments. If I had a Witch build that didn't require the Summons effects, I could still sell that as easily as I could an item from a different class. And, again, your not designing the game from the solo outwards, your designing it from the outwards inwards. Trade is a purely optional element, which would still exists with or without class-required weighting. I don't see how this would make the endgame more difficult. Again, you use trade as an example. Again, you would still be finding other items and trade would still be mainly about 'actually rare' items and mods. I don't see the difference. And, as I postulated on the 'other thread', the weighting could be turned off Endgame for the purist masochists. It's not 'pure' RNG and yes, pure RNG would give the same chance of an Exalted as a Scroll of Wisdom. What do people do if they want a fully arbitrary way of deciding a contest? Split the deck - 52 equal chances. I prefer pure RNG if a game is promoted as pure RNG, but I'm happy with what most games do and 'weight' the RNG. Were discussing an improved weighting afterall, not pure RNG, so asking if I think Exalts should be as common as Scrolls is irrelevant to the thread as it's not the topic. Yes, it would make multi-classing harder in the short-term. Just the same as the Chromatics make multi-classing harder and the start locations make multi-classing harder and the stat-requirements make multi-classing harder. If you're only interested in 'protecting' the insanity of Endgame, turn it off at Endgame. |
![]() |
And for whatever this is worth, real auditors often achieve results within a meaningful confidence interval for a population consisting of many thousands of entries with sample sizes under 100.
I absolutely cannot and will not say that is a valid comparison however it should give one pause to consider the test performed may be more likely to be valid than one might think. What it is, is a damn good anecdote. Given we don't have access to the actual loot drop code that is as good as we are her going to have. |
![]() |
I agree with this somewhat.
Classes and all things aside. My Mara, Duelist and Ranger can use armor, evasion or a mix due to a certain passive. My latest endeaver is a CI witch. I can only use 1 type of equipment on that (es) and it also happens to be the hardest to find to boot. Ofc on an unrelated note there are way less CI characters than non-CI so that somewhat makes trading for ES gear easier. However getting easy trades because everyone's stacking hp and not es is another thing :P Main problem with your suggestion is how will you determined what class someone is. I have a duel wielding ranger. A freeze pulse marauder and a physical archer duelist. If my duel wield ranger starts getting too many bows, my freeze pulse maurader starts getting all hammers and my duelist starts getting only swords I will have to come through your monitor and deal with it :D ------ Also in reality trading is only semi- optional in these games. Anyone who has been playing since D1 or D2 knows you either trade or you deal with using subpar gear. There's no way to weight gear on classes in a class less game. Last edited by BraedonH#0264 on Mar 26, 2013, 1:14:48 PM
|
![]() |
" Wrong. Out of all the types of armour, 61 of the 356 are pure ES. |
![]() |
" ohh im sorry and out of those how many are armor, evasion or armor/evasion hybrid? Yah go back and take math class thanks. |
![]() |