Probably just be RNG. I haven’t noticed any significant difference in the amount of Foxfires I’ve been getting.
From my extensive gathering experience, I feel quite confident in saying that there is only a 1/20 chance of getting a Foxfire per strike on a T5/6 wood node, so it’s indeed quite possible to get a long streak of bad luck.
Got 3 on a short run the other day. 2 from one tree.
Honestly, it doesn’t serve them to reduce the foxfire rate, since farming it increases elder wood supply significantly, and the price on the market would suffer.
Many alts; handle it!
“I’m finding companies should sell access to forums,
it seems many like them better than the games they comment on.” -Horrorscope.7632
I got 5 last night from 4 trees. They must’ve increased the drop rate!
Nice troll
Anyway back at the OP, it just seems really random, I can go days without getting any no matter how many tree’s I hit, and other days I get 7 or 8 in very few tree’s ( im currently at 4 days without getting any )
I got 5 last night from 4 trees. They must’ve increased the drop rate!
Nice troll
Anyway back at the OP, it just seems really random, I can go days without getting any no matter how many tree’s I hit, and other days I get 7 or 8 in very few tree’s ( im currently at 4 days without getting any )
More like a sarcastic example of how you cannot infer changes based on small sample sizes.
I tend to agree with the forum members here: You’d need a lot of data to make such a conclusion with any level of accuracy.
I’ve seen interesting posts from players (on the forums or wiki) who want to try gathering that sort of info. You’re welcome to try to get the depth of details you need from a group of players (the larger the better, of course). But given the variable nature of drops, I’d recommend not drawing a conclusion from anecdotal evidence.
Ensign made a really good point above too. If the drop rate for something really has been nerfed, you’d notice it via the market very quickly. (Especially if the item is one that has a high trade velocity, meaning that hundreds, or even thousands, are being traded every day.)
For example, people have often made claims that Ecto drop rates were nerfed, but this has usually proven to be false. The one time that Ecto drop rates DID get bugged, we had evidence of this very quickly; supply of Ecto on the TP collapsed dramatically within a day, and prices shot up to almost 4 times its usual value. That got John Smith’s and the devs’ attention that something was wrong, and the bug got located and fixed.
Ensign made a really good point above too. If the drop rate for something really has been nerfed, you’d notice it via the market very quickly. (Especially if the item is one that has a high trade velocity, meaning that hundreds, or even thousands, are being traded every day.)
For example, people have often made claims that Ecto drop rates were nerfed, but this has usually proven to be false. The one time that Ecto drop rates DID get bugged, we had evidence of this very quickly; supply of Ecto on the TP collapsed dramatically within a day, and prices shot up to almost 4 times its usual value. That got John Smith’s and the devs’ attention that something was wrong, and the bug got located and fixed.
I thought it was everyone pooling their salvage drops together and finding the percentage was way off?
Well here’s the thread. Haven’t read through it enough to determine if it was the changes in the market, everyone comparing results, or a combination.
Ensign made a really good point above too. If the drop rate for something really has been nerfed, you’d notice it via the market very quickly. (Especially if the item is one that has a high trade velocity, meaning that hundreds, or even thousands, are being traded every day.)
For example, people have often made claims that Ecto drop rates were nerfed, but this has usually proven to be false. The one time that Ecto drop rates DID get bugged, we had evidence of this very quickly; supply of Ecto on the TP collapsed dramatically within a day, and prices shot up to almost 4 times its usual value. That got John Smith’s and the devs’ attention that something was wrong, and the bug got located and fixed.
I thought it was everyone pooling their salvage drops together and finding the percentage was way off?
Yeah, that was additional proof the community provided. But the first indicator that something was off was the sudden spike in price and drop in supply of Ectos.
Ensign made a really good point above too. If the drop rate for something really has been nerfed, you’d notice it via the market very quickly. (Especially if the item is one that has a high trade velocity, meaning that hundreds, or even thousands, are being traded every day.)
For example, people have often made claims that Ecto drop rates were nerfed, but this has usually proven to be false. The one time that Ecto drop rates DID get bugged, we had evidence of this very quickly; supply of Ecto on the TP collapsed dramatically within a day, and prices shot up to almost 4 times its usual value. That got John Smith’s and the devs’ attention that something was wrong, and the bug got located and fixed.
I thought it was everyone pooling their salvage drops together and finding the percentage was way off?
Yeah, that was additional proof the community provided. But the first indicator that something was off was the sudden spike in price and drop in supply of Ectos.
I added the link. The jump could have been made as a result of the thread.
Irregardless, any changes would still be quickly noticed by players.
It could have been a healthy mixture of both, I admit. Still, a sudden drop in supply is just about impossible to fake in a global market like the TP. A brief price spike may be possible if a well-heeled TP baron bought up a huge supply, but he wouldn’t be able to stop or slow down the new supply coming in, which ANet can monitor; that could only occur if something happened to reduce Ecto acquisition.
It’s a combination of data that’s required to show there’s a noticeable change in the actual drop rates. It doesn’t matter whether the community used TP data or not, the point is that it wasn’t sufficient for any single player to claim a rate change. What made it compelling was showing data on 1,000s of salvages.
Accordingly, the OP saying that they happened to see 5-6/day for the last month or so, but one day saw only 1 doesn’t amount to sufficient data. We’d need to know how many whacks total before and after the alleged drop rate change.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Although I generally do not like to make statements with regards to drop rates without a large sample size I tend to agree with the OP in this case. From my personal experience chopping saplings near Orr statues does not drop as many foxfire clusters as it did before.
This confuses me because I feel like the Community Manager is hinting at the opposite. Which makes sense because if something was changed it should be shown in the patch notes. Although some changes are not always described in the patch notes (most noticeable for dungeon changes).
Although I generally do not like to make statements with regards to drop rates without a large sample size I tend to agree with the OP in this case. From my personal experience chopping saplings near Orr statues does not drop as many foxfire clusters as it did before.
This confuses me because I feel like the Community Manager is hinting at the opposite. Which makes sense because if something was changed it should be shown in the patch notes. Although some changes are not always described in the patch notes (most noticeable for dungeon changes).
You can’t base perceived changes on qualitative observations without there being sufficient quantitative data to back it up. The thing is that the human mind tries to find patterns in things and quite often it’s in things where there are no patterns to begin with.
Although I generally do not like to make statements with regards to drop rates without a large sample size I tend to agree with the OP in this case. From my personal experience chopping saplings near Orr statues does not drop as many foxfire clusters as it did before.
This confuses me because I feel like the Community Manager is hinting at the opposite. Which makes sense because if something was changed it should be shown in the patch notes. Although some changes are not always described in the patch notes (most noticeable for dungeon changes).
You can’t base perceived changes on qualitative observations without there being sufficient quantitative data to back it up. The thing is that the human mind tries to find patterns in things and quite often it’s in things where there are no patterns to begin with.
So you’re basically repeating what I said in my first sentence. Concluding that it’s just patterns of the human mind is equally as likely to be the case as a change to the drop rate of the foxfire clusters. We shouldn’t ignore it just because we can’t back it up with quantitative data. Although I personally believe it would be a lot easier if ANet came with a clear statement whether or not it has been changed.
Although I generally do not like to make statements with regards to drop rates without a large sample size I tend to agree with the OP in this case. From my personal experience chopping saplings near Orr statues does not drop as many foxfire clusters as it did before.
This confuses me because I feel like the Community Manager is hinting at the opposite. Which makes sense because if something was changed it should be shown in the patch notes. Although some changes are not always described in the patch notes (most noticeable for dungeon changes).
You can’t base perceived changes on qualitative observations without there being sufficient quantitative data to back it up. The thing is that the human mind tries to find patterns in things and quite often it’s in things where there are no patterns to begin with.
So you’re basically repeating what I said in my first sentence. Concluding that it’s just patterns of the human mind is equally as likely to be the case as a change to the drop rate of the foxfire clusters. We shouldn’t ignore it just because we can’t back it up with quantitative data. Although I personally believe it would be a lot easier if ANet came with a clear statement whether or not it has been changed.
What I said is the complete opposite of your first sentence and your entire post for that matter. You openly admit to not going by a large sample size but by your own observations.
Concluding that it’s just patterns versus it being a change in the drop rate do not have the same probability of occurring. I’m also not saying that observations should be ignored. What I am saying is that you cannot make claims without quantitative data to back up those claims. Anet does not have to make a statement every time someone perceives a drop rate for something has been changed. Otherwise, they’ll constantly be making those statements.
We shouldn’t ignore it just because we can’t back it up with quantitative data.
In fact, we should ignore claims that we cannot back up with quantitative data.
Humans are good at creating patterns, even when there aren’t any in the underlying data. We tend to notice examples that reinforce our perceptions and we our horrible about remembering those that don’t, unless the cognitive dissonance is too great to ignore.
The first thing that I do when I believe that a drop rate has changed is to start counting. After the Mystic Forge changed the results for Exotic Weapon outputs, with average level 75 rare/exotic inputs, I suspected that the rates on forging sigils and dyes had been changed — I had a string of 20 forges on the former with 10 promotions (expected: only 4) and a string of 20 forges on the later with no promotions (expected: ~4). So I kept track for the next 100 of each, over a week or two. Turned out, those were just flukes and there was no point in posting on the forums to see if anyone else was experiencing results other than the expected 20% rate.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
On a personal note, after a good day during the week when I acquired 4 Foxfire from just 24 Elder Wood Logs, I’ve now gone through 72 logs without a single Foxfire. RNG is RNG.
Prices are rising again.. that alone should be a pretty good indicator.. Of course, it could just be that people farm it less, but, demand should also have dropped for that price range.
Halloween has just started so I’m betting it’s because everybody is now farming in the Labyrinth/hunting achievements so less people are out in Orr and elsewhere.
It’s rising because the prices got so low that people have less incentive to park alts there.
Got any quantitative data to back that up?
I’m trying to point out that not every discussion should turn into a scientific research project and people should be able to make statements based on their personal perceptions, especially on a gaming discussion forum.
It’s rising because the prices got so low that people have less incentive to park alts there.
Got any quantitative data to back that up?
I’m trying to point out that not every discussion should turn into a scientific research project and people should be able to make statements based on their personal perceptions, especially on a gaming discussion forum.
There’s more to it than just this but it’s more believable than the drop rate having been changed. Look up gamblers fallacy which is based on people’s perception. People, by nature, try to make patterns in everything. This is why their perceptions are often prone to being incorrect.
Quite a lot of research starts off as qualitative. However, any conclusions are usually quantitative.
