Pointless argument about chance and randomness

"

This is what Deccode is missing, it is random, but the results of that random event are weighted.

ok, I originaly though that dev would have made it by taking all the possible outcome ( 6 would be quite unlikely then ) and give an equal chance to each of them ( one could have been much more likely ocnsidering that there would be 6 different locations for it ).

So the system is random, but is manipulated.

"

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.

Randomness does not imply that at all.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

This is what Deccode is missing, it is random, but the results of that random event are weighted.

ok, I originaly though that dev would have made it by taking all the possible outcome ( 6 would be quite unlikely then ) and give an equal chance to each of them ( one could have been much more likely ocnsidering that there would be 6 different locations for it ).

So the system is random, but is manipulated.

Precisely.

Sorry Fruz you are changing topic and lowering my IQ not worth to talk to you in all honestly.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

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

That depends how they are manipulated. Don't ignore my questions.

They are manipulated on purpose from a human being lol. In this case the devs made it harder to roll a 6 link socket (item with 5 links between 6 sockets) which is not random anymore. How hard is this for you seriously?

"

Deccode wrote:

They are manipulated on purpose from a human being lol. In this case the devs made it harder to roll a 6 link socket (item with 5 links between 6 sockets) which is not random anymore. How hard is this for you seriously?

But that outcome is based on a completely random event, how hard is it for you?

"

Deccode wrote:

Not sure if this is how it is done here or how you think it should be overall. Not only could you calculate it by using your own link or (here it's easier for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auAvt7CIezM), No you could also calculate it in head. I'm not sure if you can reroll the same number of sockets of after using a jeweler orb (I think it happened to me) or you can make the item without sockets at all. So if you have an item without sockets and you use an jeweler orb there are 6 possible outcomes. Therefore the chance to get a 6 socketed item is 1/6. It's simply simple even proved by the link you are praising and repeating.

Just wow... 1/6 to get a 6 socket? That is extremely easy to disprove in game.
The number I stated was from memory of a dev post in a thread where someone had made a statistical analysis of jeweler orbs.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

Not sure if this is how it is done here or how you think it should be overall. Not only could you calculate it by using your own link or (here it's easier for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auAvt7CIezM), No you could also calculate it in head. I'm not sure if you can reroll the same number of sockets of after using a jeweler orb (I think it happened to me) or you can make the item without sockets at all. So if you have an item without sockets and you use an jeweler orb there are 6 possible outcomes. Therefore the chance to get a 6 socketed item is 1/6. It's simply simple even proved by the link you are praising and repeating.

Just wow... 1/6 to get a 6 socket? That is extremely easy to disprove in game.
The number I stated was from memory of a dev post in a thread where someone had made a statistical analysis of jeweler orbs.

Thats why I asked "not sure if this is how it is done here or how you think ti should be done".
Blindness OP.
Let's say you throw a dice with 6 sides on each sides it has a number from 1 to 6. The number of the dice equals to the sockets on a chest. If I put a weak magnet inside the dice under the number 1 and roll the dice on an iron table it will most likely be 1. This is how it is done I believe in this game with weak magnet on 1 socket and even lower magnets going towards 6 sockets while 6 has no magnet.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

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.

Randomness does not imply that at all.

"Random selection is a method of selecting items (oftentimes called units) from a population where the probability of choosing a specific item is the proportion of those items in the population"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness

"Of or relating to an event in which all outcomes are equally likely"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/randomness

"being or relating to a set or to an element of a set each of whose elements has equal probability of occurrence"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/random

Do I need to go on? Read any intelligent article dealing with randomness and chance, you will find that they either implicitly or explicitly say the same thing.

"

Deccode wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

Not sure if this is how it is done here or how you think it should be overall. Not only could you calculate it by using your own link or (here it's easier for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auAvt7CIezM), No you could also calculate it in head. I'm not sure if you can reroll the same number of sockets of after using a jeweler orb (I think it happened to me) or you can make the item without sockets at all. So if you have an item without sockets and you use an jeweler orb there are 6 possible outcomes. Therefore the chance to get a 6 socketed item is 1/6. It's simply simple even proved by the link you are praising and repeating.

Just wow... 1/6 to get a 6 socket? That is extremely easy to disprove in game.
The number I stated was from memory of a dev post in a thread where someone had made a statistical analysis of jeweler orbs.

Thats why I asked "not sure if this is how it is done here or how you think ti should be done".
Blindness OP.
Let's say you throw a dice with 6 sides on each sides it has a number from 1 to 6. The number of the dice equals to the sockets on a chest. If I put a weak magnet inside the dice under the number 1 and roll the dice on an iron table it will most likely be 1. This is how it is done I believe in this with weak magnets on 1 socket and even lower magnets going towards 6 sockets while 6 has no magnet.

Well it's not.

If the result of that dice roll isn't random, then what is it?

"

But what you're doing in this example is taking a random roll and then manipulating the result into your system. For example, lets say that the .33% rule is correct, then using your example I roll use whatever chaotic function GGG is using to make a pseudo-random number and restrict it to 1000. So i have a basically random number 1-1000. That is the random aspect, however then I say if the number is 1-33, it's 6 slot, 33-100 5 slot, 100-400 4 slot, etc etc etc (made up numbers, just illustrating). So what you're actually doing is manipulating the truly random variable and then calling it still random.

oops missed that.

Then, I didn't manipulate anything here, I just gave an explanation of why it is easyer to get a 7 than a 1 with the basic system, considering that all the possible outcome have the same chance to come out.
I originaly though that GGG would do the same, but they do manipulate the orbs system to have the odds they want about it.
I'm familiar with programming switch which is precisely what it is about here, I just didn't think GGG would have used that over simple probabilities.

Manipulating something based on a random number still makes a system random, you can't predict the result, the result number is just computed to get the result. I believe, that based on that, we can still call it a "random" system.
But I believe even more that this is not the point of this thread ( originaly ).