Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Bubi.7942

Bubi.7942

Can’t really add much to this thread.

I’m in the exact same shoes as OP.

Done every LS achievment so far, including Liadri 8 orb, Merc camp capper, and others that probably no one did.

And all I am missing is the Volcanic fractal from Fractured!

I’ve done about 20+ runs during the Fractured! Weeks (mind you, these are usually around 1,5 hours each – some less, some way more), not Volcanic once.

I might add I’ve done over 700 Fractals before the patch, was reset from lv 52.

And just a little spice to my sad little story:

I actually did get Volcanic once. At the very minute before the patch. 3 hours until your application restarts. Alright, that should be enough, no?
Well after failing once on the last boss, a guy got dc-d (or dc-d intentionally, who knows), we waited for him to return to no avail. Then suddenly the Instance owner decided, that he wants to see the new update, so he will just restart his game. So I got thrown out.

End so ends my pityful story. And I’m sad.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Treeline.3865

Treeline.3865

The achievements for fractured are still in.

Check the achievement tab for Fractals and you will see them.

Those are not the achievements we’re talking about. There were temporary as well as permanent ones.

Leader of Heroes [Hero] – Seafarers Rest

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Pixelpumpkin.4608

Pixelpumpkin.4608

There’s absolutely no excuse for leaving players in the dark about how long an achievement category will be available for. ANet know exactly when achievements will run out, and have been asked on the forums to share the info in numerous threads. So much for “we read everything… we just don’t have time to reply” – when it literally takes 5 seconds.

Secondly, 2 weeks turned out to be not enough time, given that getting the right fractals was based on luck and the good will of four other players, on content that was not designed to be casual and couldn’t be soloed.

I managed to crank out the achievements just in time, but I know others weren’t so lucky.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Vyko.6953

Vyko.6953

+1! I couldnt make some achievs too, because fractals were very often the same ones..

#ELEtism

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: MikeyGrey.2496

MikeyGrey.2496

+1 as well. time limit was too short on this

Be who you are and say what you feel,
because those who mind don’t matter and those who matter don’t mind

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Cassio.9507

Cassio.9507

I don’t mind but I still don’t understand why we’ll have more than one more month to complete Nightmare Ends and Winter’s Day when Fractured was removed after only 14days. Many of the Fractured achievements are highly based on RNG depending on what fractals you get later on. It would’ve been nice to keep at it over the weekends. Also as a motivator to get guildies to tag along.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Treeline.3865

Treeline.3865

I don’t mind but I still don’t understand why we’ll have more than one more month to complete Nightmare Ends and Winter’s Day when Fractured was removed after only 14days. Many of the Fractured achievements are highly based on RNG depending on what fractals you get later on. It would’ve been nice to keep at it over the weekends. Also as a motivator to get guildies to tag along.

This. It makes 0 sense. They said themeselves there would be no more patches this year, so I don’t get why they wouldn’t leave Fractured around for a little longer, giving the players something to do in the Holidays.

Leader of Heroes [Hero] – Seafarers Rest

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

They extended Wintersday to end January 21st to give time for holiday vacations and to to focus more on the last 4 updates. Since Nightmare Ends was released at the same time, it got extended as well.

Living stories that are not part of the main living story or are the second part to the living story chapter, generally will not last more than two weeks. It has normally always been like this. Fractured was just a minor living story update so it made no sense to extend it longer.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Bubi.7942

Bubi.7942

SAB 1.0 and 2.0 had nothing to do with the living story. But it lasted a month.

Bazaar had little to do with the living story, and it lasted a month.

This Nightmare Ends instance lasts 6 weeks, and it’s doable in 2 hours (if you after the achievments – and what other thing would any lv 80 character do there?)

I mean, come on.

Now I can’t get all the achievments (that is important to me) just because RNG didn’t like me…

And that’s exactly what happened last year during Wintersday with the RNG box minies. Bought like 100 boxes, managed to get Foostivoo – didn’t get the others again and bam – mini collection is over. I didn’t continue after that, cause, you know, what’s the point?

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Knaifhogg.5964

Knaifhogg.5964

They’re not gonna do anything.. They didn’t do anything when the Aetherblade Dungeon Path in Twilight Arbor was removed after 2 weeks, even though the achievements said “October achievements”. They didn’t say how long it would be either. Some guessed two weeks, others four, too bad if you thought four.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

SAB 1.0 and 2.0 had nothing to do with the living story. But it lasted a month.

Bazaar had little to do with the living story, and it lasted a month.

This Nightmare Ends instance lasts 6 weeks, and it’s doable in 2 hours (if you after the achievments – and what other thing would any lv 80 character do there?)

I mean, come on.

Now I can’t get all the achievments (that is important to me) just because RNG didn’t like me…

And that’s exactly what happened last year during Wintersday with the RNG box minies. Bought like 100 boxes, managed to get Foostivoo – didn’t get the others again and bam – mini collection is over. I didn’t continue after that, cause, you know, what’s the point?

SAB is the only exception.

Bazaar lasted a month as it was the setting for the Evon/Kiel elections. That trade agreement will likely have some role n future living stories.

See my post above yours for why Nightmare Ends lasts so long.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Smirk.6702

Smirk.6702

Think of it maybe as liberation. You were going to miss one eventually.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Treeline.3865

Treeline.3865

Think of it maybe as liberation. You were going to miss one eventually.

You say that like it is a fact. Yet for over a year, many players have done every achievement.

Leader of Heroes [Hero] – Seafarers Rest

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

Think of it maybe as liberation. You were going to miss one eventually.

You say that like it is a fact. Yet for over a year, many players have done every achievement.

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Vick.6805

Vick.6805

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Umm… no. The argument is completely valid; yours isn’t. Many people completed the meta for the reward AND completed all achievements. Whether it was RNG or not doesn’t matter; many people still finished all achievements.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Cassio.9507

Cassio.9507

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Umm… no. The argument is completely valid; yours isn’t. Many people completed the meta for the reward AND completed all achievements. Whether it was RNG or not doesn’t matter; many people still finished all achievements.

So, w/ that logic applied, you’re saying that the major contributing factor to whether one manages to finish temporary content should be luck?

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Cassio.9507

Cassio.9507

I see a lot of the problems w/ achievement focused playing is the way the achievements are phrased. I know there’s limited space here, but why didn’t they simply do the Fractured boss achievements something like this:

“Do either of the end bosses five times. x / 5”

This way you’ll feel lucky when you get the boss you want. You’ll be satisfied if you only get the boss you know is a decently easy kill every time, and you’ll even be satisfied if you never end up getting one of the newer ones. The latter simply because there’s no rush anymore! You’ll get to face one of the new end bosses eventually.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Xillllix.3485

Xillllix.3485

I can’t understand why Anet removes the content before we get to play it considering how little content they are able to deliver in December and January. I also missed the Fractured story event.

I loaded the game today, did my daily for Ascended armor recipe went 30 minutes for some WvW that ended up being a Karma train zerg (boring). Went to LA and spoke about 1h with my guild-mates, then logged off. It’s been the same since that tower LS event started months ago, nothing really interesting to do because WvW is so repetitive now… All they’ve added in the last months to WvW are those useless do not touch pillars.

It’s Christmas and we can’t even go in SAB or revisit past LS events. We still can’t even play Sanctum races or Southsun survival with friends. Anyway I didn’t want to complain… It’s a great game, but removing content when you can only deliver a limited amount of it already is a very bad idea.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Umm… no. The argument is completely valid; yours isn’t. Many people completed the meta for the reward AND completed all achievements. Whether it was RNG or not doesn’t matter; many people still finished all achievements.

So, w/ that logic applied, you’re saying that the major contributing factor to whether one manages to finish temporary content should be luck?

You’re inferring something from my post that isn’t there. Please read the previous posts to understand the context of what I was arguing.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Cassio.9507

Cassio.9507

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Umm… no. The argument is completely valid; yours isn’t. Many people completed the meta for the reward AND completed all achievements. Whether it was RNG or not doesn’t matter; many people still finished all achievements.

So, w/ that logic applied, you’re saying that the major contributing factor to whether one manages to finish temporary content should be luck?

You’re inferring something from my post that isn’t there. Please read the previous posts to understand the context of what I was arguing.

Am I really? I re-read your most recent posts, and I still come to the same conclusion. You’re basically saying that it’s okay for the Fractured achievements to rely on RNG since many ppl didn’t manage to 100% previous Living Story updates.

What we’re arguing here is the sudden introduction of RNG, or “luck”, when it comes to even being able to finish off certain achievements. Add to that the quite short time span to actually “get lucky” within.

edit: Also don’t forget another important part of this discussion. Since Fractured isn’t a central part of the Living Story, it wouldn’t have changed anything at all just keeping it in the game til late January. An incentive to do some fractals wouldn’t be a negative thing now that we don’t have that much to focus on for quite a while.

(edited by Cassio.9507)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Umm… no. The argument is completely valid; yours isn’t. Many people completed the meta for the reward AND completed all achievements. Whether it was RNG or not doesn’t matter; many people still finished all achievements.

So, w/ that logic applied, you’re saying that the major contributing factor to whether one manages to finish temporary content should be luck?

You’re inferring something from my post that isn’t there. Please read the previous posts to understand the context of what I was arguing.

Am I really? I re-read your most recent posts, and I still come to the same conclusion. You’re basically saying that it’s okay for the Fractured achievements to rely on RNG since many ppl didn’t manage to 100% previous Living Story updates.

What we’re arguing here is the sudden introduction of RNG, or “luck”, when it comes to even being able to finish off certain achievements. Add to that the quite short time span to actually “get lucky” within.

edit: Also don’t forget another important part of this discussion. Since Fractured isn’t a central part of the Living Story, it wouldn’t have changed anything at all just keeping it in the game til late January. An incentive to do some fractals wouldn’t be a negative thing now that we don’t have that much to focus on for quite a while.

I’ll provide more detail into my posts. I don’t see why I need to but I guess I do.

Think of it maybe as liberation. You were going to miss one eventually.

You say that like it is a fact. Yet for over a year, many players have done every achievement.

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

The intent of this post was to refute the argument that because some players weren’t able to complete the Fractured living story that they are somehow different than others who were unable to complete previous living stories.

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

That argument is entirely invalid, as the only way to complete the full set of Fractured achievements was relying on RNG. It wasn’t just a question of time dedicated like other achievements.

Umm… no. The argument is completely valid; yours isn’t. Many people completed the meta for the reward AND completed all achievements. Whether it was RNG or not doesn’t matter; many people still finished all achievements.

Someone decided to bring the whole RNG aspect into my argument in an attempt to make my argument invalid. The fact is that whether there’s RNG or something that requires a good deal of skill (liadri), you have a finite amount of time and some people still did not complete the living stories.

So, w/ that logic applied, you’re saying that the major contributing factor to whether one manages to finish temporary content should be luck?

You’re inferring something from my post that isn’t there. Please read the previous posts to understand the context of what I was arguing.

You misread my posts and missed what my argument was. You assumed that I was arguing that finishing temp content should be based on luck which is far from what I was saying.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Treeline.3865

Treeline.3865

You say that like it is a fact. Yet for over a year, many players have done every achievement.

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

[…]

The intent of this post was to refute the argument that because some players weren’t able to complete the Fractured living story that they are somehow different than others who were unable to complete previous living stories.

In short, people who were unable to complete previous living story achievements were (mostly) due to lack of skill, time or understanding. I feel justified in saying that we are different in that we lost achievements due to lack of… Luck! I didn’t come to play Casino Online. I came here because I thought my skill and time spent on the game would decide what was possible for me to do. The least I expected was luck to be the deciding factor when it came to achievements.

Leader of Heroes [Hero] – Seafarers Rest

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

You say that like it is a fact. Yet for over a year, many players have done every achievement.

And many players were able to finish Fractured. Some players were not able to finish Fractured just as some players were not able to finish other living stories.

[…]

The intent of this post was to refute the argument that because some players weren’t able to complete the Fractured living story that they are somehow different than others who were unable to complete previous living stories.

In short, people who were unable to complete previous living story achievements were (mostly) due to lack of skill, time or understanding. I feel justified in saying that we are different in that we lost achievements due to lack of… Luck! I didn’t come to play Casino Online. I came here because I thought my skill and time spent on the game would decide what was possible for me to do. The least I expected was luck to be the deciding factor when it came to achievements.

There was more than enough time to get all of the achievements for the meta. Someone did the math in one of these threads that showed the probability of getting a certain fractal during a run and the probability of not getting within a certain number of runs. The thing is that if you played it every night, you had a low probability of not having encountered every fractal.

There were other measures that could have been done to hedge from not getting the path you needed right away. There were groups forming with people farming specific fractals. If they did not get the one they needed, they restarted and tried again.

I also disagree that luck should be any different than lack of skill, time, and/or understanding. The thing is that eventually you’re going to miss an achievement due to one reason or another. Do you do every daily and monthly achievement? Do you do all of the infinite meta achievements until they give out no more AP? If not, then I don’t see where the argument is as you’re not missing out on anything.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Dark Jericho.8609

Dark Jericho.8609

Yeah I agree OP (think I might have posted in one of your threads about this before). On a side note, after looking at your screenshots of LS accomplishments, the historical section of achievements really is getting quite lengthy when you open them; I kept scrolling and scrolling… :O

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Pinkunicorn of Dethecus.3217

Pinkunicorn of Dethecus.3217

I support this thread entirely, I believe the two week window was insufficient, and furthermore, we won’t have any content till the 21st of January anyway, why not throw this back in so at least some of us will have something to do.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Becka Williams.4978

Becka Williams.4978

The content added in the fractured living story update STILL exists. You guys are merely complaining that you can’t get achievement points. Why does the content not count unless you’re getting achievement points?

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Treeline.3865

Treeline.3865

In short, people who were unable to complete previous living story achievements were (mostly) due to lack of skill, time or understanding. I feel justified in saying that we are different in that we lost achievements due to lack of… Luck! I didn’t come to play Casino Online. I came here because I thought my skill and time spent on the game would decide what was possible for me to do. The least I expected was luck to be the deciding factor when it came to achievements.

There was more than enough time to get all of the achievements for the meta. Someone did the math in one of these threads that showed the probability of getting a certain fractal during a run and the probability of not getting within a certain number of runs. The thing is that if you played it every night, you had a low probability of not having encountered every fractal.

Yep, if you did a bunch of Fractals every day, assuming you had all the time needed every day, you have a good chance. But even so there’s that small chance that you won’t get the Fractal you need. And that’s not OK. People should be rewarded for the time they spend and the skill they have. Not dumb luck. This isn’t a slot machine.

There were other measures that could have been done to hedge from not getting the path you needed right away. There were groups forming with people farming specific fractals. If they did not get the one they needed, they restarted and tried again.

That’s not really an option, unless you’re assuming people couldn’t get the right first tier fractal… If you were missing the first or second tier fractal, sure, restart until you get it. When missing the third or a boss fractal, restarting is just about pointless as you save 30 minutes to miss out on all end rewards. 30 minutes would not even get you to the third fractal again. I see your point, but restarting with 30 minutes left on a fractal run is just pointless.

I also disagree that luck should be any different than lack of skill, time, and/or understanding. The thing is that eventually you’re going to miss an achievement due to one reason or another. Do you do every daily and monthly achievement? Do you do all of the infinite meta achievements until they give out no more AP? If not, then I don’t see where the argument is as you’re not missing out on anything.

That’s once again an assumption you have no base to make. How do you know how much time people invest in the game? How do you KNOW people will miss an achievement? Unless you show me anything that shows otherwise, the only person you can speak for is yourself. Please don’t make assumptions on what other people will or won’t do.

Now if you read my original post you would already know that I didn’t care about dailies and the like. What I cared about was the living story achievements, all the temporary ones. And yes, within that scope I did every repeatable achievement until they maxed out on AP. So my argument stays the same; There were no reason to take it out after only 14 days, especially not given they are based on RNG. Given that the content did not interfere with the current patches there were no reason to take it out. Why not let people continue to play for it?

Happy new year.

Leader of Heroes [Hero] – Seafarers Rest

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Treeline.3865

Treeline.3865

The content added in the fractured living story update STILL exists. You guys are merely complaining that you can’t get achievement points. Why does the content not count unless you’re getting achievement points?

Because that was not our goal or what we spent our time for. I consider achievements content too.

To illustrate it, do you remember the Giant Slayer achievement? Without that achievement, no one would even consider that Giants as a category of monsters. Without them, guides wouldn’t have been made, and people wouldn’t have made stragedies to get the ‘mission’ of killing 1.000 Giants done. No one would ever have killed even half that amount. In other words it would just have been a random mob. Now it’s more of a mission you can take on.

Leader of Heroes [Hero] – Seafarers Rest

(edited by Treeline.3865)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: FenrirSlakt.3692

FenrirSlakt.3692

While I have nothing against the idea of bringing these achievements back, I’d like to ask the people who didn’t complete them one thing: How many complete Fractal runs did you do during those two weeks?

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Bubi.7942

Bubi.7942

While I have nothing against the idea of bringing these achievements back, I’d like to ask the people who didn’t complete them one thing: How many complete Fractal runs did you do during those two weeks?

I personally did around 20. Did 1 every day, on some days 2. No volcanic.

Like I said in some posts above this, before the patch, I did probably around 700+ Fractals, that’s about 200 runs.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: sorudo.9054

sorudo.9054

i did none, i don’t like the mentality there so i rather avoid fights.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Becka Williams.4978

Becka Williams.4978

The content added in the fractured living story update STILL exists. You guys are merely complaining that you can’t get achievement points. Why does the content not count unless you’re getting achievement points?

Because that was not our goal or what we spent our time for. I consider achievements content too.

To illustrate it, do you remember the Giant Slayer achievement? Without that achievement, no one would even consider that Giants as a category of monsters. Without them, guides wouldn’t have been made, and people wouldn’t have made stragedies to get the ‘mission’ of killing 1.000 Giants done. No one would ever have killed even half that amount. In other words it would just have been a random mob. Now it’s more of a mission you can take on.

The only reason why people have strategies is because there’s a grand total of 3 giants that count towards the achievement. If there were more of them, they’d be a mob people might actually kill. Do you only kill mobs that have an achievement behind them? Do you stop killing mobs once you’ve gotten the achievement for them?

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Vick.6805

Vick.6805

As the thread has veered off course yet again, the primary point of this thread is to state that temporary, RNG-based achievements are unacceptable, regardless of an individual player’s reasons for pursuing the achievements.

Strategy, dedication, teamwork, and skill are all perfectly acceptable things for a temporary achievement to reward. RNG achievements should only ever be used as permanent achievements, which allow for a potentially infinite number of chances to succeed.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

There was more than enough time to get all of the achievements for the meta. Someone did the math in one of these threads that showed the probability of getting a certain fractal during a run and the probability of not getting within a certain number of runs. The thing is that if you played it every night, you had a low probability of not having encountered every fractal.

I also disagree that luck should be any different than lack of skill, time, and/or understanding. The thing is that eventually you’re going to miss an achievement due to one reason or another. Do you do every daily and monthly achievement? Do you do all of the infinite meta achievements until they give out no more AP? If not, then I don’t see where the argument is as you’re not missing out on anything.

I don’t think you understand probability. It’s an expectation on a grand scheme. Here’s an example from my previous game: After a new dungeon was introduced and religiously ran by my team, I could swear it loved lancers. In 30 runs I saw 4 lancers get full sets and some spare items. In those same 30 runs I saw no weapon or chest for my class(got the weapon on 35th run, never saw the chest in a total of 51 runs when I gave up and crafted a better one). When those 30 runs were done and we were looking at drops, another team from my guild reported 8 weapons and 5 chests that were for my class. Their lancer was, ironically, still waiting for a lance. All those items had the same chance of dropping. And I’m sure that if you count all the run done by all the players, you’d have the expected 1/16 ratio. But for individual players or teams, some items were simply more common while others were practically non-existent. Because probability on small scale is pointless. If you toss a coin 2 times, you can have 2 times tails. If you toss it 10 times, you can have 7 times tails, if you toss it 100 times, you can have 60 times tails etc etc…the large the scale, the closer you get to the expected probability value, the smaller the scale, the bigger the chance that you just won’t get what you were hoping for or expecting.
TL;DR: Your first paragraph is basically “If you’d ran 1000 fractals, you’d have gotten it for sure so it’s totally your fault!”

The whole appeal of this game is how little impact RNG has on goals. That’s, like, the only reason I play it. Because my time, my skill and my understanding matter more than dumb luck. If I want my goals to rely on luck, there are better games than GW2.

How do you know OP was going to miss an achievement? Unless you were planning on kidnapping him for the duration of a LS, you can’t possibly make such a claim.

Did you even read? OP likes LS achievements. Not all achievements, just LS. That’s his personal goal in the game. We all have one, for some(maybe even most), it’s a different one. But that doesn’t mean his is somehow worse or should be dismissed with “it won’t kill you”. My personal goal in recent games is a BiS set. Do you know how much I hate it when people tell me that “you don’t need it, you can do everything in -insert lesser set here-, just enjoy the game”. My enjoyment of the game is based on achieving that personal goal. Not on what you think my personal goal should be or how insignificant and/or silly you find my personal goal.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

I don’t think you understand probability. It’s an expectation on a grand scheme. Here’s an example from my previous game: After a new dungeon was introduced and religiously ran by my team, I could swear it loved lancers. In 30 runs I saw 4 lancers get full sets and some spare items. In those same 30 runs I saw no weapon or chest for my class(got the weapon on 35th run, never saw the chest in a total of 51 runs when I gave up and crafted a better one). When those 30 runs were done and we were looking at drops, another team from my guild reported 8 weapons and 5 chests that were for my class. Their lancer was, ironically, still waiting for a lance. All those items had the same chance of dropping. And I’m sure that if you count all the run done by all the players, you’d have the expected 1/16 ratio. But for individual players or teams, some items were simply more common while others were practically non-existent. Because probability on small scale is pointless. If you toss a coin 2 times, you can have 2 times tails. If you toss it 10 times, you can have 7 times tails, if you toss it 100 times, you can have 60 times tails etc etc…the large the scale, the closer you get to the expected probability value, the smaller the scale, the bigger the chance that you just won’t get what you were hoping for or expecting.
TL;DR: Your first paragraph is basically “If you’d ran 1000 fractals, you’d have gotten it for sure so it’s totally your fault!”

I understand probability very well and did not go into depth as I saw no need. You may want to look into it a bit more as what is in the game for fractal selection is much different than what you’re thinking. The probability is known and can be accurately calculated.

To put it in another way: think of the different between calculating the probability of getting a precursor from loot drops and calculating the probability of getting a certain fractal. Both of these are entirely different. I believe it’s called probability vs non-probability or something similar to that. It’s been quite some years since I took a course on statistics.

With a known probability, you can calculate out over however many attempts it would likely take to get a certain fractal. Sure there’s always that probability that you will not get the fractal within those attempts but it gets lower the more you do. I also want to point out that there is a difference when I’m discussing probability of a single run (doesn’t ever change) vs the probability over a number of runs. Many people often get confused by this as the difference is subtle.

The whole appeal of this game is how little impact RNG has on goals. That’s, like, the only reason I play it. Because my time, my skill and my understanding matter more than dumb luck. If I want my goals to rely on luck, there are better games than GW2.

Every game has RNG. You can play 99% of the game without having to rely on RNG. That seems pretty fair to me. FotM has been RNG for well over a year. The only change made was split the fractals up into tiers.

How do you know OP was going to miss an achievement? Unless you were planning on kidnapping him for the duration of a LS, you can’t possibly make such a claim.

It’s probability. Things happen that you cannot anticipate. It was a general statement and not one directed at him specifically.

Did you even read? OP likes LS achievements. Not all achievements, just LS. That’s his personal goal in the game. We all have one, for some(maybe even most), it’s a different one. But that doesn’t mean his is somehow worse or should be dismissed with “it won’t kill you”. My personal goal in recent games is a BiS set. Do you know how much I hate it when people tell me that “you don’t need it, you can do everything in -insert lesser set here-, just enjoy the game”. My enjoyment of the game is based on achieving that personal goal. Not on what you think my personal goal should be or how insignificant and/or silly you find my personal goal.

Yes, I did read all of his post. I just don’t see the difference between missing one living story achievement when other achievements (daily/monthly – PvE/PvP) are missed as well. No content was really lost as you could still do that particular fractal. If it was something directly involved with a story, I could understand. However, those achievements were just busy work (filler) to give you something to do until the next update. Roughly 90% of all living story achievements are like that.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

With a known probability, you can calculate out over however many attempts it would likely take to get a certain fractal.

“Likely” being the key word. Not guaranteed.

Sure there’s always that probability that you will not get the fractal within those attempts but it gets lower the more you do. I also want to point out that there is a difference when I’m discussing probability of a single run (doesn’t ever change) vs the probability over a number of runs. Many people often get confused by this as the difference is subtle.

Is there some sort of fractal limit? Like, if you do 3 of fractal A, it won’t show up for you again until a certain condition is met(for example, server restart or you do all other fractals 3 times)? Because that is the only way probability changes over time.

Every game has RNG. You can play 99% of the game without having to rely on RNG. That seems pretty fair to me. FotM has been RNG for well over a year. The only change made was split the fractals up into tiers.

And give 14 days to make the RNG work in your favour.

Yes, I did read all of his post. I just don’t see the difference between missing one living story achievement when other achievements (daily/monthly – PvE/PvP) are missed as well. No content was really lost as you could still do that particular fractal. If it was something directly involved with a story, I could understand. However, those achievements were just busy work (filler) to give you something to do until the next update. Roughly 90% of all living story achievements are like that.

Yes, you don’t see it. He obviously does. Because it’s his personal goal. I’ll try it again:
There are different achievement categories. You don’t need to care about all of them in order to care about one of them. You can want to complete every WvWvW achievement without also wanting to complete every Slayer achievement and vice versa, right? So why do you think it’s impossible that somebody might want to complete every LS achievement without wanting to complete every daily? He specifically said that he doesn’t care about AP or achievements in general. He cares about completing LS achievements because that’s what “I did it all” means to him.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

“Likely” being the key word. Not guaranteed.

Exactly. Nothing is guaranteed. That’s essentially what probability is. Doesn’t weaken my argument though.

Is there some sort of fractal limit? Like, if you do 3 of fractal A, it won’t show up for you again until a certain condition is met(for example, server restart or you do all other fractals 3 times)? Because that is the only way probability changes over time.

Nope. I suggest that you research more into probability. You’re making the same mistake that I said many people do.

And give 14 days to make the RNG work in your favour.

The RNG is very minimal when it comes to fractal selection. Having 14 days was more than enough time.

Yes, you don’t see it. He obviously does. Because it’s his personal goal. I’ll try it again:
There are different achievement categories. You don’t need to care about all of them in order to care about one of them. You can want to complete every WvWvW achievement without also wanting to complete every Slayer achievement and vice versa, right? So why do you think it’s impossible that somebody might want to complete every LS achievement without wanting to complete every daily? He specifically said that he doesn’t care about AP or achievements in general. He cares about completing LS achievements because that’s what “I did it all” means to him.

Oh no I saw what he was saying. I still don’t see an issue. Some achievements require skill (liandri), some to grind out a number of tasks (50 Toypocalpse waves survived), and some are tied to RNG (moa betting). The RNG associated with the living story achievements was more than reasonable. If someone is trying to get all of the living story achievements then they should be capable of adapting to get it whether it’s because it’s RNG or they lack the skill for something that requires a higher skill level.

(edited by Ayrilana.1396)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

Exactly. Nothing is guaranteed. That’s essentially what probability is. Doesn’t weaken my argument though.

Actually, it does just that. Probability reflects the expected result, not the actual outcome. Saying “it has low probability so it can’t happen” is puppy. And that is what you are trying to argue. But at the end, probability is irrelevant. What matters is the outcome. And in this case the outcome for some was not completing the achievement despite a reasonable amount of attempts.

Nope. I suggest that you research more into probability. You’re making the same mistake that I said many people do.

Care to elaborate on what that mistake might be?

The RNG is very minimal when it comes to fractal selection. Having 14 days was more than enough time.

The RNG is absolutely everything when it comes to fractal selection because fractals are, most likely, selected by an RNG. Otherwise there would be a discernible pattern to it.

Oh no I saw what he was saying. I still don’t see an issue. Some achievements require skill (liandri), some to grind out a number of tasks (50 Toypocalpse waves survived), and some are tied to RNG (moa betting). The RNG associated with the living story achievements was more than reasonable. If someone is trying to get all of the living story achievements then they should be capable of adapting to get it whether it’s because it’s RNG or they lack the skill for something that requires a higher skill level.

You can’t really adapt to RNG. It’s, by definition, out of your control. You can adapt to a skill-based activity by increasing your skill level, looking up how2-tips, practising the fight until you build up reflexes for it. You can adapt to a limited amount of repetitions by knowing how long it would take you to complete the task and putting the time(+ a grace period) aside. The only way to somewhat adapt to RNG is by increasing the amount of tries into infinity(aka, until its done). However, when that RNG comes with a time stamp, you…can’t. You can’t infinitely keep doing fractals because you only have 2 weeks to complete it.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

Actually, it does just that. Probability reflects the expected result, not the actual outcome. Saying “it has low probability so it can’t happen” is puppy. And that is what you are trying to argue. But at the end, probability is irrelevant. What matters is the outcome. And in this case the outcome for some was not completing the achievement despite a reasonable amount of attempts.

Nope. Try again. Oh, low probability does not mean something cannot ever happen. I never said that.

Care to elaborate on what that mistake might be?

See the first quote I responded to in this post.

The RNG is absolutely everything when it comes to fractal selection because fractals are, most likely, selected by an RNG. Otherwise there would be a discernible pattern to it.

I was referring to the impact.

You can’t really adapt to RNG. It’s, by definition, out of your control. You can adapt to a skill-based activity by increasing your skill level, looking up how2-tips, practising the fight until you build up reflexes for it. You can adapt to a limited amount of repetitions by knowing how long it would take you to complete the task and putting the time(+ a grace period) aside. The only way to somewhat adapt to RNG is by increasing the amount of tries into infinity(aka, until its done). However, when that RNG comes with a time stamp, you…can’t. You can’t infinitely keep doing fractals because you only have 2 weeks to complete it.

You can. If you lack the skill for something then you have to spend the time to reach the required skill level. If something has RNG, you have to spend time until you get the desired result. Time is the key element here where adaptation means you’ll have to spend more of it.

Once again you’re still missing the key difference that I mentioned many times.

I’ll throw you a hint by using an example:

Suppose you have a six-sided die. What is the probability of landing on either of the sides? What is the probability of landing on a particular side within 6 tosses?

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

Nope. Try again. Oh, low probability does not mean something cannot ever happen. I never said that.

What am I trying again?

See the first quote I responded to in this post.

That’s not an elaboration.

You can. If you lack the skill for something then you have to spend the time to reach the required skill level. If something has RNG, you have to spend time until you get the desired result. Time is the key element here where adaptation means you’ll have to spend more of it.

Except the time it takes you to reach the skilled level depends entire on you. The time it takes you to reach the RNG level depends entirely on outside forces that you can do nothing about. You can spend 1000 hours in fotm and only then see fractal A. Only, you don’t have 1000 hours, do you? And there is a difference in the feeling between “I failed” and “I didn’t get lucky”.

Think about it. How many movies feature the frustrating event of “I can’t finish this project in time because I’m bad at my job”? And how many movies feature “puppy it, I finished the project in time but now I’m stuck in an elevator because an out-of-the-blue lightning hit the power lines”? Why do you think that is? Knowing you could’ve done something and not being able to do it due to forces outside your control is far more frustrating than simply not being able to do it. It’s also why players generally hate RNGs in games. When somebody complains that a dungeon is too hard, you see a lot of “learn2pay, puppy” replies. When somebody complains that it took them 500 tries to get 20 clovers, you see mostly “oh, yeah, i know exactly how you feel and it sucks” or “woah, i’m lucky!” Nobody tells the clover guy to go puppy himself and virtually everybody sympathizes with him.

Once again you’re still missing the key difference that I mentioned many times.

I’ll throw you a hint by using an example:

Suppose you have a six-sided die. What is the probability of landing on either of the sides? What is the probability of landing on a particular side within 6 tosses?

Oh, now I know what you mean. Here’s the real issue. You aren’t the only one tossing that dice. There’s 200 other people taking turns to toss it. That’s what makes the chain probability inapplicable to such events and they should be viewed as individual for each player.

elaborating Let’s say you want a 3. You toss the dice and get a 4. The chance that the next dice toss will be a 3 is higher because the probability needs to be reflected in the big picture(basically, out of 600 tosses, 100 have to be a 3, 100 have to be a 4, 1 4 is already gone, you know what i mean). But then somebody else tosses the dice and gets a 5, then somebody else gets a 3, then a 2 etc etc. By the time you get another turn, 50 3s have been tossed in 200 tries. Your odds at tossing a 3 are thus lower even though you weren’t the one who got those 50 3s. Fotm is a dice shared by all players, not your personal one. That’s what makes a chain probability calculations simply wrong in this case(and quite a few others) and independent odds are more reliable. /end elaborate

Oh, about RNG’s impact. It’s everything. RNG is the thing that decides on what you are getting. You don’t even know how the fotm RNG works(unless you designed it). For all we know, it can be based on time frames. So, if OP plays at the same time every day, he’ll be getting the exact same fractals every day. Which is something most working people do due to having a schedule. You can’t say what impact RNG would have on somebody’s experience without knowing how that RNG works…

(edited by TWMagimay.9057)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

What am I trying again?

The argument that you were making. Probability can be expressed for a singular event or multiple events. There’s the probability that you can roll a 6 with a die in a single toss (doesn’t ever change) and then there’s the probability of rolling a 6 within 6 tosses. The two probabilities are not the same. In the second case, the more attempts you make the greater the probability of achieving it within those attempts. You’re far more likely to roll a 6 within 1,000 attempts than you would with only 6 attempts.

That’s not an elaboration.

I didn’t see a need to repeat myself which is why I didn’t elaborate.

Except the time it takes you to reach the skilled level depends entire on you. The time it takes you to reach the RNG level depends entirely on outside forces that you can do nothing about. You can spend 1000 hours in fotm and only then see fractal A. Only, you don’t have 1000 hours, do you? And there is a difference in the feeling between “I failed” and “I didn’t get lucky”.

Yes. The time it takes for either could be completely different. Someone could take longer with RNG than skill-based and vice versa. It’s reliant on the player. I was trying to express that a player could adapt by increasing the amount of time that they would use. Both of those require time.

Yes, there is a difference between “I failed” and “I didn’t get lucky”. Time is still the deciding factor. Given enough time, people can learn most things. Given enough time, people can achieve something that has a fixed probability.

Oh, now I know what you mean. Here’s the real issue. You aren’t the only one tossing that dice. There’s 200 other people taking turns to toss it. That’s what makes the chain probability inapplicable to such events and they should be viewed as individual for each player.

Incorrect. One group rolling for a certain fractal does not impact another group rolling for that same fractal. Two different people rolling two dice 6 times will have the same probability rolling a 6 within that many attempts. This does not mean that both will roll a 6 in that many attempts or at all.

elaborating Let’s say you want a 3. You toss the dice and get a 4. The chance that the next dice toss will be a 3 is higher because the probability needs to be reflected in the big picture(basically, out of 600 tosses, 100 have to be a 3, 100 have to be a 4, 1 4 is already gone, you know what i mean). But then somebody else tosses the dice and gets a 5, then somebody else gets a 3, then a 2 etc etc. By the time you get another turn, 50 3s have been tossed in 200 tries. Your odds at tossing a 3 are thus lower even though you weren’t the one who got those 50 3s. Fotm is a dice shared by all players, not your personal one. That’s what makes a chain probability calculations simply wrong in this case(and quite a few others) and independent odds are more reliable. /end elaborate

What you just said is known as gambler’s fallacy. For the part about fotm being a shared dice, see my response above this.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

Yes, there is a difference between “I failed” and “I didn’t get lucky”. Time is still the deciding factor. Given enough time, people can learn most things. Given enough time, people can achieve something that has a fixed probability.

That’s right. “Given enough time”. Except you are given a limited time frame to achieve something. And, seriously, it’s called a “theory” for a reason. You can do 100 fractals and never get fractal A. That’s called “practice”.

Incorrect. One group rolling for a certain fractal does not impact another group rolling for that same fractal. Two different people rolling two dice 6 times will have the same probability rolling a 6 within that many attempts. This does not mean that both will roll a 6 in that many attempts or at all.

So, you are basically suggesting that I have my own personal fotm and you have your own personal fotm. How does that work exactly? And what happens when you and I are in the same group? Are the odds for my fotm taken into consideration or the odds for your fotm?

(edited by TWMagimay.9057)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

That’s right. “Given enough time”. Except you are given a limited time frame to achieve something that doesn’t have a fixed probability.

Actually it does. Over a year ago when fractals were first released, it was stated that the fractal selection was random. Random means there’s no discernible pattern. All that was changed with the Fractured update was that the fractal were split into tiers.

So, you are basically suggesting that I have my own personal fotm and you have your own personal fotm. How does that work exactly? And what happens when you and I are in the same group? Are the odds for my fotm taken into consideration or the odds for your fotm?

You don’t have it quite yet. It’s based on each individual group. An individual who has rolled swamp 100 times in a row does not impact whether or not the group they’re in will roll swamp.

EDIT:

Saw you edited your post so I’ll address what was changed.

That’s right. “Given enough time”. Except you are given a limited time frame to achieve something. And, seriously, it’s called a “theory” for a reason. You can do 100 fractals and never get fractal A. That’s called “practice”.

Yes, you can do 100 fractal runs and not get a certain fractal. However, the probability of that occurring is very low. It’s called probability, not practice. Whether it is a theory or not doesn’t matter. It’s a well tested theory taught in schools around the world.

(edited by Ayrilana.1396)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

You don’t have it quite yet. It’s based on each individual group. An individual who has rolled swamp 100 times in a row does not impact whether or not the group they’re in will roll swamp.

What evidence do you have to back that up? “That” being that every time a group enters fotm, a new dice is generated specifically for them and rolled instead of the much simpler having 1 dice already existing and being rolled every time fotm is entered?

Additionally, if that is, indeed, the case, your entire argument is puppy. Because if there is a new dice generated for each group, each fotm entry is completely independent of all others and there is no probability stacking of any sorts. The odds for each dice roll remain 1/6 because there are no other events to influence them.

Yes, you can do 100 fractal runs and not get a certain fractal. However, the probability of that occurring is very low. It’s called probability, not practice. Whether it is a theory or not doesn’t matter. It’s a well tested theory taught in schools around the world.

And we are back to “just because the probability is low doesn’t mean the event won’t happen”. It being a theory is all that matters when it comes to the practical experience of a player. Tell a person dying of cancer that the probability of them dying was 1% and see if that makes any difference to them. (Disclaimer: I apologise about the somewhat insensitive example, but it’s the most illustrative I got in the case.) Then you can explain to them about how it’s taught in school and stuff and it being just a theory doesn’t matter….right…

(edited by TWMagimay.9057)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Ayrilana.1396

Ayrilana.1396

What evidence do you have to back that up? “That” being that every time a group enters fotm, a new dice is generated specifically for them and rolled instead of the much simpler having 1 dice already existing and being rolled every time fotm is entered?

It was stated that fractal selection is random. Random means well random. If it was influenced by something then it’s not random. If you knew about probability then you’d understand and wouldn’t be asking for proof. So you think that what one groups rolls affects another? Do you also believe that your loot is impacted by what others get as well?

Additionally, if that is, indeed, the case, your entire argument is puppy. Because if there is a new dice generated for each group, each fotm entry is completely independent of all others and there is no probability stacking of any sorts. The odds for each dice roll remain 1/6 because there are no other events to influence them.

You’re still missing it. Probability doesn’t stack. The last sentence is correct but you’re just not understanding the rest.

And we are back to “just because the probability is low doesn’t mean the event won’t happen”. It being a theory is all that matters when it comes to the practical experience of a player. Tell a person dying of cancer that the probability of them dying was 1% and see if that makes any difference to them. (Disclaimer: I apologise about the somewhat insensitive example, but it’s the most illustrative I got in the case.) Then you can explain to them about how it’s taught in school and stuff and it being just a theory doesn’t matter….right…

A well tested theory is better and more reliable than personal experience. The human mind tends to try to make patterns out of things whether there is or not. Just look at the numerous threads about MF or the most recent ones about a supposed ecto salvage rate nerf.

Your example is misleading as it’s about emotions rather than the mathematics itself. I almost want to say it’s a borderline strawman argument.

Since I see this going nowhere, this will be my last post on this particular topic rather than repeat myself any further. I highly suggest reading about probability or even taking a class or two. It does have real world applications which makes it worth it. Anyway, thank you for the discussion.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

It was stated that fractal selection is random. Random means well random. If it was influenced by something then it’s not random. If you knew about probability then you’d understand and wouldn’t be asking for proof. So you think that what one groups rolls affects another? Do you also believe that your loot is impacted by what others get as well?

You do realise that true randomness doesn’t exist in programming, right? So in this case random means “programmed to appear random while following a certain algorithm”. That’s also why it has to be 1 dice. By increasing the scale and splitting the results between multiple parties, the pattern can’t be discerned because you can’t observe all results.

You’re still missing it. Probability doesn’t stack. The last sentence is correct but you’re just not understanding the rest.

It’s the best word I know to describe it. That’s how you get higher probability over multiple tries. Otherwise your chance of rolling a 3 would always be 1/6.

A well tested theory is better and more reliable than personal experience. The human mind tends to try to make patterns out of things whether there is or not. Just look at the numerous threads about MF or the most recent ones about a supposed ecto salvage rate nerf.

Your example is misleading as it’s about emotions rather than the mathematics itself. I almost want to say it’s a borderline strawman argument.

Since I see this going nowhere, this will be my last post on this particular topic rather than repeat myself any further. I highly suggest reading about probability or even taking a class or two. It does have real world applications which makes it worth it. Anyway, thank you for the discussion.

Yeah, I’ve seen those. They tend to also have people who say “it’s all in your head”. Because, again, that’s a shared dice. For every guy experiencing a decrease in something, there is another guy(or multiple other guys) experiencing an increase. People just tend to question bad luck while embracing good luck. So when you are getting more ectos than usual, you don’t go on the forum(because, duhhh, if you report an increase they might nerf it and that’s bad for you).

No, it’s not about emotions. It’s about the difference between expectation and result. For the last time(because it seems really hard for you to understand), probability isn’t a guarantee(unless it’s 100%). “Given enough time” is also meaningless. Because “enough time” is relative. For you it can be 5h. For me it can be 50 hours. For John it can be 500h.

It’s real applications are to calculate an expected result. Nobody who understands probability, views it as a gospel. That’s why we use machines to predict earthquakes and don’t rely on the probability of an earthquake. That’s why doctors do tests and don’t go off on the probability of a patient having a decease(I almost died when a doctor decided to go with the probability, luckily my dad, the engineer, knew how ridiculous relying on probability was and got me tested). I also had a colleague, statistics major. He put himself through school with sports betting. Guess what, he wasn’t betting based on probability. He had multiple bookies and was betting on different results in such amounts that no matter the outcome, he always ended up with a profit. Because everybody knows relying on probability is literally the last resort. It’s on the same level as tossing a coin before you cross the street instead of looking at the traffic light or looking left and right.

This discussion actually helped me realise what the real problem is with these calculations. They are based on assumed values. Here’s an example: I’m holding 52 cards in my hand. What’s the probability of you drawing queen of diamonds? 1/52? That’d be the logical, simple answer. But what if I took out all hearts and replaced them with queens of diamonds? Or what if I took out queen of diamonds and replaced it with a second queen of hearts? You don’t know that. Just like you don’t know what the initial probability for each fractal is. You assume that because there are x fractals, it’s 1/x. But it doesn’t have to be. It can easily be higher for some, lower for others. Deliberate or a programming error. Point is, you don’t know. That alone makes any and all calculations made up.

(edited by TWMagimay.9057)

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Antonio Cappello.1806

Antonio Cappello.1806

You do realise that true randomness doesn’t exist in programming, right?

Right, so this isn’t true. The most basic form of RNG done using a computer is pseudorandom number generation (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudorandom_number_generator). The principle of PRNG is that a seed is generated based on some kind of deterministic value (say, the system clock), and that seed is used to generate a field of random numbers. However, if you peruse the Wikipedia article, you’ll find that this makes the numbers effectively random. If, for example, fractal generation is seeded by the server clock (which is likely accurate to the millisecond), to even guarantee two groups got the same seed would require that both groups step into the fractal at exactly the same moment (accurate to the precision of one millisecond). Network latency alone would make this a nigh impossible task.

I’m not sure why you feel there needs to be only one die, but that is provably false. The seed generation may indeed be deterministic, but the rest of the process is not. In a way, the seed determines which die you get.

It’s the best word I know to describe it. That’s how you get higher probability over multiple tries. Otherwise your chance of rolling a 3 would always be 1/6.

Right, except your chance of rolling a 3 is indeed always 1/6. You’re falling into the (quite common) gambler’s fallacy (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy). In the example of a coin flip or die roll, the system has no memory of its previous flips. If you flip 20 heads in a row, the chance of your next flip being a head is still 1/2. The chance of you getting 21 heads in a row is ~9.54 × 10^-7. That certainly seems small! However, the chance of you rolling 20 heads and then a single tail is also ~9.54 × 10^-7.

In fact, if you determine that you’ll be doing a set number of fractals (say, 10 runs), then each time you don’t get the fractal you want, you actually have a smaller probability of getting the right fractal (check the article for the math behind that).

Yeah, I’ve seen those. They tend to also have people who say “it’s all in your head”. Because, again, that’s a shared dice.

That has nothing to do with having a “shared die”. The probability distribution of your rewards (and your fractals) is independent of the next guy’s. If there’s someone out there getting all of the swamp fractals, that doesn’t make it any more or less likely that you’ll see it. You seem to have a misunderstanding of what a probability distribution actually is. Small samples may or may not conform to the distribution, but at statistically large sample sizes, they will. There is also no rule in probability that states that a streak of good luck must be followed by a streak of bad luck or vice versa. Probabilities do not balance out that way, and that’s just more of the gambler’s fallacy.

… snip for the rest …

Sure engineers use probability. That’s basically what “tolerance” is. For every batch of sheet metal produced, there’s an allowable amount that the sheet thickness is allowed to waver, where this conforms to some probability distribution. In a very bad design process, the probability distribution is constant; in other words, each sheet has a completely random chance of being any thickness within the tolerance. Of course, with engineering, we do testing to ensure that our numbers are correct, and we account for those tolerances in design. The same goes with medical issues. Your comment that “we don’t use the probabilities” is somewhat nonsensical, because a probability only tells us the likelihood. If you have a 0.5% risk of developing a particular illness and you’re displaying symptoms that could either be that illness or some other set of diseases, it’s probably better to check for the other more common diseases first.

You may find it interesting to look up Bayes’ theorem (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes'_theorem). We do not need to know the initial probability of the fractals appearing in order to determine the probability distribution, because the update rule for Bayes’ theorem allows us to build it from the ground up! We can even predict whether there’s bias in the system. We already know such a bias exists, since the fractals are tiered. If one wished to do so, one could run a few thousand fractals to build the probability distribution. Or, by Occam’s Razor, it’s probably fine to note that it’s easier for ArenaNet to program a random distribution within each tier, as opposed to biasing fractals for some arbitrary reason.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: TWMagimay.9057

TWMagimay.9057

-snip-

First of all, simulated randomness =/= true randomness. If there is an algorithm deciding on an order, then, by definition, it’s not random. No matter how random it might appear.

Second, of course they aren’t connected and the dice doesn’t remember the previous roll. However, for the expected result(what probability tells us) to be close to the real outcome, you need to observe events on a large scale thus connecting separate events. That’s why your chance of rolling a 20th tails in a roll isn’t 50%.

Lastly, a large part of Bayes’ theorem relies on guess work. You assume certain conditions to be true and calculate the probability based on that. That’s far from accurate now, is it? The rest of it relies on extensive testing. Sure, if somebody was to run thousands of fractals and collect the data from those, the resulting distribution would be rather accurate. Except that’s not how people make the game forum probability calculations. They go off of the assumption that the data is pristine and fair. I’m not saying it’s not, I’m saying we don’t know whether it is or isn’t. Which is why those calculations are ultimately pure speculation and waving them around saying “you had enough time this maybe correct maybe very wrong probability calculating post says so” is puppy.

Fractured! - Give it back. 14 days not OK.

in Living World

Posted by: Antonio Cappello.1806

Antonio Cappello.1806

First of all, simulated randomness =/= true randomness. If there is an algorithm deciding on an order, then, by definition, it’s not random. No matter how random it might appear.

Second, of course they aren’t connected and the dice doesn’t remember the previous roll. However, for the expected result(what probability tells us) to be close to the real outcome, you need to observe events on a large scale thus connecting separate events. That’s why your chance of rolling a 20th tails in a roll isn’t 50%.

The only difference between pseudorandom and random is outlined in the Wikipedia article I linked. Notably, none of the statistical differences between RNG and PRNG would have any bearing on the game.

No, your chance of flipping a 20th tails in a row is indeed 50%. Your chance of flipping 20 tails in a row is not 50%, but once you’ve flipped those 19 tails already, the last flip has a 50% probability of being heads and a 50% probability of being tails. There’s nothing questionable or debatable about that statement in this case, since we’re describing a system without memory of its previous outcomes.

Lastly, a large part of Bayes’ theorem relies on guess work. You assume certain conditions to be true and calculate the probability based on that. That’s far from accurate now, is it? The rest of it relies on extensive testing. Sure, if somebody was to run thousands of fractals and collect the data from those, the resulting distribution would be rather accurate. Except that’s not how people make the game forum probability calculations. They go off of the assumption that the data is pristine and fair. I’m not saying it’s not, I’m saying we don’t know whether it is or isn’t. Which is why those calculations are ultimately pure speculation and waving them around saying “you had enough time this maybe correct maybe very wrong probability calculating post says so” is puppy.

If you believe that a large part of Bayes’ theorem relies on guesswork, you need to research a bit more on the subject, as that is entirely incorrect. Bayesian statistics is a staple in statistical mechanics, and with a good prior, is incredibly accurate, especially when bias is involved. Picking a good prior is vital, but it should not involve guesswork, nor does it need to in this case. We know the fractals are tiered. We can assume that the fractals within each tier are randomly generated, with the caveat that no fractal may appear twice. That’s a good prior to start with. Then we test it and run experiments (running fractals), and update our prior using the Bayesian state update rule. If there’s bias, it will show in our updated prior, and our statistical model will converge with reality. The only way this would not be the case is if our original prior was widely off base (e.g. if ArenaNet imposed a massive bias towards one or two fractals). However, why would they do this? Occam’s Razor suggests that this wouldn’t be the case.