Pointless argument about chance and randomness

"

Deccode wrote:

"

drzpicu wrote:

I also dont think that having a 75% chance of getting a magic item, 22% of getting a rare and 3% of getting an unique is "random". Thats just bullshit. Not that I disagree with that concept, the wording is just plain wrong.

This is orb of fusing not orb of chance topic. Sorry but I have to agree with the other topic where orb of chance has a correct wording. It's not named Orb of Randomness after all.

lolwat.xmls

"Upgrades a normal item to a random rarity."

"

drzpicu wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

"

drzpicu wrote:

I also dont think that having a 75% chance of getting a magic item, 22% of getting a rare and 3% of getting an unique is "random". Thats just bullshit. Not that I disagree with that concept, the wording is just plain wrong.

This is orb of fusing not orb of chance topic. Sorry but I have to agree with the other topic where orb of chance has a correct wording. It's not named Orb of Randomness after all.

lolwat.xmls

"Upgrades a normal item to a random rarity."

Oh that is wrong indeed lol. I totally forgot about that part thought it's about the name of the item.

"

Deccode wrote:

Lol what I throw links at you which you don't even understand. It's like I post a link you ignore it, you post a link we discuss it. Now I ignore thinks... you are like throwing shit at yourself. Whatever you say is 100% correct for yourself.

Oh man, it's like talking to a wall here.
You have ignored the conent of my last 3 posts, and yet you say that I am ignoring stuff?

I am still waiting for you to explain this picture:



What do you think the numbers 0.2, 0.5 and 0.3 are?

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

Lol what I throw links at you which you don't even understand. It's like I post a link you ignore it, you post a link we discuss it. Now I ignore thinks... you are like throwing shit at yourself. Whatever you say is 100% correct for yourself.

Oh man, it's like talking to a wall here.
You have ignored the conent of my last 3 posts, and yet you say that I am ignoring stuff?

I am still waiting for you to explain this picture:



What do you think the numbers 0.2, 0.5 and 0.3 are?

You are like ignoring everything. Let me ask you again... Are manipulated events random?

Since this is an active thread probably on the topic:
What is the chance of making an item 6 socket with jeweller's and what's the chance of making a 6 socket 6 link or 5 link with fusings? I've read posts about it somewhere but this forum doesn't have really have a search function.

"

Aelloon wrote:

Since this is an active thread probably on the topic:
What is the chance of making an item 6 socket with jeweller's and what's the chance of making a 6 socket 6 link or 5 link with fusings? I've read posts about it somewhere but this forum doesn't have really have a search function.

I believe it's 0.33% to make a 6 socket with jeweler and 0.33% to link all sockets with fusings.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

Lol what I throw links at you which you don't even understand. It's like I post a link you ignore it, you post a link we discuss it. Now I ignore thinks... you are like throwing shit at yourself. Whatever you say is 100% correct for yourself.

Oh man, it's like talking to a wall here.
You have ignored the conent of my last 3 posts, and yet you say that I am ignoring stuff?

I am still waiting for you to explain this picture:



What do you think the numbers 0.2, 0.5 and 0.3 are?

Despite how horribly Deccode is presenting himself, he's actually correct. The difference you're arguing is randomness versus chance. Your picture is depicting the CHANCE that one of the outcomes occur, and the chance of these outcomes are not equal. However, just because a system relies on chance does not make it random. Randomness implies that the outcome is equally likely to occur proportional to the number of outcomes, whereas general probability allows any outcome to have bias or different chances of occurring.

"

Deccode wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

Lol what I throw links at you which you don't even understand. It's like I post a link you ignore it, you post a link we discuss it. Now I ignore thinks... you are like throwing shit at yourself. Whatever you say is 100% correct for yourself.

Oh man, it's like talking to a wall here.
You have ignored the conent of my last 3 posts, and yet you say that I am ignoring stuff?

I am still waiting for you to explain this picture:



What do you think the numbers 0.2, 0.5 and 0.3 are?

You are like ignoring everything. Let me ask you again... Are manipulated events random?

In a way... yes. A biased random variable.

Double posted apparently, so I'll use this space just... because:

"

Kreos wrote:

Despite how horribly Deccode is presenting himself, he's actually correct. The difference you're arguing is randomness versus chance. Your picture is depicting the CHANCE that one of the outcomes occur, and the chance of these outcomes are not equal. However, just because a system relies on chance does not make it random. Randomness implies that the outcome is equally likely to occur proportional to the number of outcomes, whereas general probability allows any outcome to have bias or different chances of occurring.

http://www.stat.yale.edu/Courses/1997-98/101/ranvar.htm

If that isn't considered random AT ALL then I'm afraid I would have to be shocked and appalled.

Let me make it clear though: I'm arguing that a random variable has two ways it can be formed. On a curve which is a biased outcome (certainly not equal), or it can have a uniform curve (in which it is fair).

You are stating that we are wrong to believe random variables can have a bias, but you insist that random variables MUST ABSOLUTELY have an equal probability to be considered a random variable?

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Aelloon wrote:

Since this is an active thread probably on the topic:
What is the chance of making an item 6 socket with jeweller's and what's the chance of making a 6 socket 6 link or 5 link with fusings? I've read posts about it somewhere but this forum doesn't have really have a search function.

I believe it's 0.33% to make a 6 socket with jeweler and 0.33% to link all sockets with fusings.

Jeweler's odds are correct, there. It's 1:306 to roll a 6S, 5:306 to roll a 5S, 30:306 to roll a 4S, 80:306 to roll a 3S, 90:306 to roll a 2S, and 100:306 to roll 1S (this is assuming the item is capable of rolling 6 sockets). Catch is, they can't roll the same amount of sockets as the previous roll, so when an item is sitting on one socket, odds are 1:206 for a 6S, 5:206 for a 5S, etc. I actually wrote a tool to simulate using a boatload of jeweler's on an item.

Also, using the probabillity of how often you'll sit on 1S items (and therefore unable to roll 1S on the next roll), etc., you'll see 1 socket 30.2%, 2S 28.5%, 3S 26.51%, 4S 12.14%, 5S 2.21% and 6S 0.45% of the time. Meaning, on average, it will take ~224 Jeweler's to get an item to be 6 socketed.

Fusing odds are different, probably something like 300:270:240:90:15:1 for 1:2:3:4:5:6 links, respectively (I just tripled the chances for each type, leaving 6L at 1, based on my in game experience over the last year+). Also note that the first socket rolls for a link, so if it hits a "1" (which in my guesstimation is 300:916 odds) it won't have a link between the first and 2nd socket, it will then roll again on the 2nd socket, etc.