| Author | Content | Date |
|---|---|---|
|
JACKELPUP |
I should have asked this question eons ago;
The debate on the validity of “failers” was never resolved. Some folk swear by them and others denounce the action as a mathematical impossibility. As much as I am a fan of mathematics, I never did understand how the “failers” were put to use…. What is the regime (whether proven or not) for forcing fails with drugs? (I also considered that drugs had a fixed success rate while a ToE is skill related) 8) Jac
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="JACKELPUP"]I should have asked this question eons ago;
The debate on the validity of “failers” was never resolved. Some folk swear by them and others denounce the action as a mathematical impossibility.
As much as I am a fan of mathematics, I never did understand how the “failers” were put to use….
What is the regime (whether proven or not) for forcing fails with drugs?
(I also considered that drugs had a fixed success rate while a ToE is skill related)
8)
Jac
[/quote]
|
#1 2018/02/25 08:55:16 |
|
TYPHIN |
the idea is that you force a fail to occur, offsetting the RNG or likelyhood of the upgrade directly following the fail being another fail.
Some do fail 1 but some do fail 2 or even 3 before putting the good stuff up for the chop. the argument over whether this is true clashes with the fact tht dropped upgrades such as drugs and pills do not require 100, 150 skill in a metal craft to be used its a fixed sucess chance
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="TYPHIN"]the idea is that you force a fail to occur, offsetting the RNG or likelyhood of the upgrade directly following the fail being another fail.
Some do fail 1 but some do fail 2 or even 3 before putting the good stuff up for the chop.
the argument over whether this is true clashes with the fact tht dropped upgrades such as drugs and pills do not require 100, 150 skill in a metal craft to be used
its a fixed sucess chance[/quote]
|
#2 2018/02/25 10:34:33 |
|
FRINGE |
thats why u use drawing tab etc for armwep and blue pill/drugs for access like str/dex etc
|
#3 2018/02/25 12:12:42 |
|
JACKELPUP |
So,
The theory is to use craftable fails on upgrades where skill is required and non-craftable fails on skill-less upgrades. Pointless using drugs on weapons to force a fail in lieu of a ToE ? 8) Jac |
#4 2018/02/25 13:54:49 |
|
1355 |
I think the problem lies where people expect fails then automatic success 100% no questions asked and then they dont get it and decide its pointless. Its all about consecutive probability.
For example its 67% chance to +1 at 150 skill now if it fails the chance of that was 33%, the probability of two in a row failing will be 16.5% and then 8.25% and so on. So you can imagine it would be really uncommon to fail four +1 in a row and then have the 5th fail and if it did you still had an edge regardless of the outcome. Its no different to flipping a coin to see how many times you get the same result in a row resetting each time the chain breaks, ofc this is 50% independently but consecutively the chance halves each time for the same result. Upgrades have their % fixed based on the + its on as well as weather its skill based one. So if you would determine how low a % your item is worth before trying, do you want it under 1%? Sure if you have enough failers to get the desired amount. Remember the 0 skill upgrades act at the same rate as 150 skill and the skill based are varible rates based on 100/150/200 etc. I would recommend using 0 skill failers for 0 skill that matter to you and skill based failers for skill based that matter.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="1355"]I think the problem lies where people expect fails then automatic success 100% no questions asked and then they dont get it and decide its pointless. Its all about consecutive probability.
For example its 67% chance to +1 at 150 skill now if it fails the chance of that was 33%, the probability of [b]two in a row[/b] failing will be 16.5% and then 8.25% and so on. So you can imagine it would be really uncommon to fail four +1 in a row and then have the 5th fail and if it did you still had an edge regardless of the outcome.
Its no different to flipping a coin to see how many times you get the same result in a row resetting each time the chain breaks, ofc this is 50% independently but consecutively the chance halves each time for the same result.
Upgrades have their % fixed based on the + its on as well as weather its skill based one. So if you would determine how low a % your item is worth before trying, do you want it under 1%? Sure if you have enough failers to get the desired amount.
Remember the 0 skill upgrades act at the same rate as 150 skill and the skill based are varible rates based on 100/150/200 etc.
I would recommend using 0 skill failers for 0 skill that matter to you and skill based failers for skill based that matter.[/quote]
|
#5 2018/02/26 03:30:14 |
|
CELTS |
"1355"I think the problem lies where people expect fails then automatic success 100% no questions asked and then they dont get it and decide its pointless. Its all about consecutive probability. surely the % depends on every single upgrade you have done in the past. and not just the couple you have done before hand.. I personally don't bother with fails unless someone asks me to do it before doing an upgrade for them
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="CELTS"][quote="1355"]I think the problem lies where people expect fails then automatic success 100% no questions asked and then they dont get it and decide its pointless. Its all about consecutive probability.
For example its 67% chance to +1 at 150 skill now if it fails the chance of that was 33%, the probability of [b]two in a row[/b] failing will be 16.5% and then 8.25% and so on. So you can imagine it would be really uncommon to fail four +1 in a row and then have the 5th fail and if it did you still had an edge regardless of the outcome.
Its no different to flipping a coin to see how many times you get the same result in a row resetting each time the chain breaks, ofc this is 50% independently but consecutively the chance halves each time for the same result.
Upgrades have their % fixed based on the + its on as well as weather its skill based one. So if you would determine how low a % your item is worth before trying, do you want it under 1%? Sure if you have enough failers to get the desired amount.
Remember the 0 skill upgrades act at the same rate as 150 skill and the skill based are varible rates based on 100/150/200 etc.
I would recommend using 0 skill failers for 0 skill that matter to you and skill based failers for skill based that matter.[/quote]
surely the % depends on every single upgrade you have done in the past. and not just the couple you have done before hand..
I personally don't bother with fails unless someone asks me to do it before doing an upgrade for them [/quote]
|
#6 2018/03/05 07:18:45 |
|
1355 |
If you are looking at the overall % of all upgrades attempted yes, it will typically gravitate to 5% up/down of the actual % of success rate. But this is specifically to do with consecutive rolls which isnt the same thing.
|
#7 2018/03/05 12:13:41 |
|
CELTS |
"1355"If you are looking at the overall % of all upgrades attempted yes, it will typically gravitate to 5% up/down of the actual % of success rate. But this is specifically to do with consecutive rolls which isnt the same thing. dose chaos theory not come into this ? i suggest we pass this back to jac to work it out. Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="CELTS"][quote="1355"]If you are looking at the overall % of all upgrades attempted yes, it will typically gravitate to 5% up/down of the actual % of success rate. But this is specifically to do with consecutive rolls which isnt the same thing. [/quote]
dose chaos theory not come into this ?
i suggest we pass this back to jac to work it out.
Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.[/quote]
|
#8 2018/03/06 00:04:19 |
|
JACKELPUP |
Oh Joy.
All things being equal, a single flip of a coin will land heads up or tails up. Having done so, there is a 100% success rate in one direction and 0% in the other. Over time, the more flips that occur, the distance between the 100% and 0% narrows. Imagine a million flips; it is “likely” to result in the order of 49.9% vs 50.1% (or thereabouts). It doesn’t matter what the actual figures are. The point is it narrows over time. The question begs itself, how meaningful actually is this during the “fail” process used by players in-game? …. I am pretty sure that there will be “some” people who do know through trial and error but would rather keep that information to themselves. (Can’t blame them for that) 8) Jac
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="JACKELPUP"]Oh Joy.
All things being equal, a single flip of a coin will land heads up or tails up. Having done so, there is a 100% success rate in one direction and 0% in the other.
Over time, the more flips that occur, the distance between the 100% and 0% narrows.
Imagine a million flips; it is “likely” to result in the order of 49.9% vs 50.1% (or thereabouts).
It doesn’t matter what the actual figures are. The point is it narrows over time.
The question begs itself, how meaningful actually is this during the “fail” process used by players in-game?
…. I am pretty sure that there will be “some” people who do know through trial and error but would rather keep that information to themselves.
(Can’t blame them for that)
8)
Jac
[/quote]
|
#9 2018/03/06 07:21:35 |
|
CELTS |
"JACKELPUP"Oh Joy. so the answer in all that is ? you don't know ?
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="CELTS"][quote="JACKELPUP"]Oh Joy.
All things being equal, a single flip of a coin will land heads up or tails up. Having done so, there is a 100% success rate in one direction and 0% in the other.
Over time, the more flips that occur, the distance between the 100% and 0% narrows.
Imagine a million flips; it is “likely” to result in the order of 49.9% vs 50.1% (or thereabouts).
It doesn’t matter what the actual figures are. The point is it narrows over time.
The question begs itself, how meaningful actually is this during the “fail” process used by players in-game?
…. I am pretty sure that there will be “some” people who do know through trial and error but would rather keep that information to themselves.
(Can’t blame them for that)
8)
Jac
[/quote]
so the answer in all that is ?
you don't know ?[/quote]
|
#10 2018/03/07 23:03:15 |
|
FRINGE |
a gamble is a gamble. using fails to try and stack the odds on the next upgrade being a success does work to an extent. but there have been days ive had 5 fails in a row. which is a killer. normally after 3 fails in a row 90%+ of the time ive had a success.
|
#11 2018/03/07 23:11:32 |
|
JIBBY |
"1355"I think the problem lies where people expect fails then automatic success 100% no questions asked and then they dont get it and decide its pointless. Its all about consecutive probability. This is some really flawed thinking. Try using that logic on a roullete wheel and see how far it gets you. The last roll has no effect on the current one. Now granted if you were to get maybe 3 or 4 fails in a row you might rightly expect the next attempt to succeed. Much like that roulette wheel, if the previous 5 spins have been red, then you might rightly feel like black is the best bet for the next spin, but in reality it's still a 50/50 chance.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="JIBBY"][quote="1355"]I think the problem lies where people expect fails then automatic success 100% no questions asked and then they dont get it and decide its pointless. Its all about consecutive probability.
For example its 67% chance to +1 at 150 skill now if it fails the chance of that was 33%, the probability of [b]two in a row[/b] failing will be 16.5% and then 8.25% and so on. So you can imagine it would be really uncommon to fail four +1 in a row and then have the 5th fail and if it did you still had an edge regardless of the outcome.
Its no different to flipping a coin to see how many times you get the same result in a row resetting each time the chain breaks, ofc this is 50% independently but consecutively the chance halves each time for the same result.
Upgrades have their % fixed based on the + its on as well as weather its skill based one. So if you would determine how low a % your item is worth before trying, do you want it under 1%? Sure if you have enough failers to get the desired amount.
Remember the 0 skill upgrades act at the same rate as 150 skill and the skill based are varible rates based on 100/150/200 etc.
I would recommend using 0 skill failers for 0 skill that matter to you and skill based failers for skill based that matter.[/quote]
This is some really flawed thinking. Try using that logic on a roullete wheel and see how far it gets you. The last roll has no effect on the current one.
Now granted if you were to get maybe 3 or 4 fails in a row you might rightly expect the next attempt to succeed. Much like that roulette wheel, if the previous 5 spins have been red, then you might rightly feel like black is the best bet for the next spin, but in reality it's still a 50/50 chance.
[/quote]
|
#12 2018/04/04 23:15:20 |
|
MINGEPIECE |
unless u hit 0
|
#13 2018/04/05 11:46:02 |
|
1355 |
@jibby
Consecutive betting is a thing and has real odds. If your bet on a roulette wheel was on one number and you rebet the winnings so £1 into £36 into £1296 and so on thats not the same as playing £1 3 times in a row. The bet is not 1/37, 1/37, 1/37 its 37 x 37 x 37 if your bet is dependant on the previous.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="1355"]@jibby
Consecutive betting is a thing and has real odds. If your bet on a roulette wheel was on one number and you rebet the winnings so £1 into £36 into £1296 and so on thats not the same as playing £1 3 times in a row. The bet is not 1/37, 1/37, 1/37 its 37 x 37 x 37 if your bet is dependant on the previous. [/quote]
|
#14 2018/04/06 14:49:57 |
|
JIBBY |
"1355"@jibby I know the system well and have actually had success using it in the past. My only point is soma uses a RNG exactly like an online roulette wheel. After a couple of failed upgrades you might logically think the next one has a better chance of succeeding, but the reality is it's still just a random spin of a roulette wheel not affected by the previous spin.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="JIBBY"][quote="1355"]@jibby
Consecutive betting is a thing and has real odds. If your bet on a roulette wheel was on one number and you rebet the winnings so £1 into £36 into £1296 and so on thats not the same as playing £1 3 times in a row. The bet is not 1/37, 1/37, 1/37 its 37 x 37 x 37 if your bet is dependant on the previous. [/quote]
I know the system well and have actually had success using it in the past. My only point is soma uses a RNG exactly like an online roulette wheel. After a couple of failed upgrades you might logically think the next one has a better chance of succeeding, but the reality is it's still just a random spin of a roulette wheel not affected by the previous spin.[/quote]
|
#15 2018/04/14 08:08:31 |
Please sign in with one of your characters to reply