The RNG deception.

"

Idioticus wrote:

"

stayflyazn wrote:

rng doesnt discriminate, a fixed or semi-fixed system does. while non-guarantees can be daunting and disheartening, satisfaction doesnt always mean health. forseen or not, there is always a sacrifice with any system.

RNG does discriminate, if it didn't, everyone would spend the exact same amount of fusings to get certain amount of links.

You don't look at the starting point, you look at the results.

Idioticus, rng does not discriminate. Looking at it your way is being short-sighted. The chances for linking is the same for each individual. There is no bias. No discrimination.

Post deleted, made into new thread.

"

stayflyazn wrote:

with a rng, having more fusing gives you more chances, not a better chance. the problem isnt the rng, its the accessibility. if it were raining fusings, ppl wouldnt be complaining as much even if the chances to 6 link were to be slimmer.

You do know that these two are essentially the same thing, right? You're practically even admitting it in the next sentence.

"

Ocylix wrote:

Idioticus, rng does not discriminate. Looking at it your way is being short-sighted. The chances for linking is the same for each individual. There is no bias. No discrimination.

Let's say 990 people get their 6L with 800 fusings or less.
9 people get theirs with more than 1500 fusings.
and 1 person is on his 10000th fusing and still no 6L.
This is how the situation is after 1000 selected people have attempted 6 linking their items.

Let's give this thing 2 options:
1. the system is based on RNG.

2. GGG hires Randy Norman Gardner, whose username is RNG. His job was simple, all he had to do, was select who gets their 6L with a certain amount of fusings.

Tell me, how are these 2 options any different to the 1000 people who have not been told how the system works?

"

stayflyazn wrote:

"

Idioticus wrote:

Because someone with a 10000 fusings to spend surely doesn't have a better chance at getting a 6L than someone with 1.

I guess we should somehow make a limit on how many fusings a player can use in their lifetime, so as not to discriminate those who can't afford fusings.

with a rng, having more fusing gives you more chances, not a better chance. the problem isnt the rng, its the accessibility. if it were raining fusings, ppl wouldnt be complaining as much even if the chances to 6 link were to be slimmer.

Can't believe this actually needs to be said, but in any situation in which the outcome is based on rng your chance for success is directly proportional to the number of iterations you can perform.

Crafting in this case is no different. Just because the chance on any given iteration is the same does not mean 2 people will have the same chance to succeed.

I proposed a solution on page 7, which I feel would work as a pretty good system. You're right though, rng doesn't discriminate, but the current system will create an economy like d3 where top-end currency/items are worth loads while the middle currency and items become either unsellable or so devalued that your only hope of getting good end-game gear is getting super lucky rng rolls crafting/dropping or turning to rmt to buy the gear.

That is of course talking about those of us who can't play more than a couple hours per say, those able to no-Life won't really notice much difference other than needing more time to get items/currency worthwhile.

"

Idioticus wrote:

Let's give this thing 2 options:
1. the system is based on RNG.

2. GGG hires Randy Norman Gardner, whose username is RNG. His job was simple, all he had to do, was select who gets their 6L with a certain amount of fusings.

Tell me, how are these 2 options any different to the 1000 people who have not been told how the system works?

Randy might be biased. He might not like the letter I. The RNG doesn't pre-determine which players will succeed or fail. It's unbiased. You're forming a class of players after the fact... "unlucky players" and saying that that indicates bias. It doesn't.

Maybe the characters should actually gain some experience (improved odds) from crafting. You'd think after the 1500th attempt they'd be able to put six fucking holes in a piece of metal.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

"

Idioticus wrote:

Let's give this thing 2 options:
1. the system is based on RNG.

2. GGG hires Randy Norman Gardner, whose username is RNG. His job was simple, all he had to do, was select who gets their 6L with a certain amount of fusings.

Tell me, how are these 2 options any different to the 1000 people who have not been told how the system works?

Randy might be biased. He might not like the letter I. The RNG doesn't pre-determine which players will succeed or fail. It's unbiased. You're forming a class of players after the fact... "unlucky players" and saying that that indicates bias. It doesn't.

In that example, the end result was the same for both, as was stated earlier.

It doesn't matter whether someone is actively and consciously trying to discriminate, when in the end, discrimination will have been done.

i spent around 4200 Fusings now trying to 6l my shavronne. awesome. fair. np

Every time I see this thread I think the OP just finished reading The God Delusion...

"

Idioticus wrote:

You do know that these two are essentially the same thing, right? You're practically even admitting it in the next sentence.

"

Z3roSh0t wrote:

Can't believe this actually needs to be said, but in any situation in which the outcome is based on rng your chance for success is directly proportional to the number of iterations you can perform.

Crafting in this case is no different. Just because the chance on any given iteration is the same does not mean 2 people will have the same chance to succeed.

flip a coin. it gets tails. what are the chances that it gets heads on the next flip? its it higher cuz you flipped a tail before? no. the chance of flipping heads is the same for each and every flip. now, better is one of those words where personal opinion can hav an influence. what i said is that you get more chances with more fuses, but not better chances as in having a higher probability on the actual roll. you see, the current system doesnt discriminate btw those who play more and those that don't, you can roll thousands and never get it, or you can roll less that ten to get you there.