Guild Wars 2

This method can be risky if you do not trust the people you are doing this with, so I suggest doing it with friends or close guildees.

also using this, you will not be gaining many vouchers, or gold but it’s to try to make getting the 3 wins for the achievement easier and less costly for the chance that you aren’t so lucky

So with 5 people betting that is a 2.5 G bet pot
total winnings would be is they all choose different moas would be 2.2 G
making a difference of 30 silver
so with that in mind, take a group of 5 and all bet on different moas to cover them all.
1st place gets 1.4G
2nd place gets 0.6G
3rd place gets 0.2G
4th and 5th get nothing
when vouchers are redeemed you’ll get the gold. so with that the people in 1st and 2nd would give up their winning and 6 more silver because of the difference
so if we all had 50 silver to start it would be like this

p1- .5—> 1.4
p2- .5—> .6
p3- .5—> .2
p4- .5—> 0
p5- .5—> 0
then trading off then it would look like
p1-1.4-( – 0.96)-> .44
p2- .6- ( -0.22)-> .44
p3- .2-( +0.24)-> .44
p4- 0-( +0.44)-> .44
p5- 0-( +0.44)-> .44
so yes we all lose 6 silver this way but 1 in the group got first place and closer to achievement and not as big of a loss like 50 silver or more if your unlucky (like me).

I dunno I just thought about this idea and maybe it’s not that great, but i find it helpful if i had a group I trust, but when 1 person gets 3 points first well, then I guess you need another trustable person to fill in or a slightly riskier idea below.

use 4 people so with bet dump at 2.0 G and most winnings at 2.2G then as long as 1st and 2nd is won, there is no loss or if 3rd is won, a slight gain of 20 silver divided by 4 meaning 5 silver. Then you can just work out the math in that to make it even again.
If you get duped, it’s not my fault, this is just an idea on how people can help with achievement with less loss then losing 10 times and still no 1st place (but yea not much gain either). I’ve yet to try it out because most my guild was offline but yea, it sounds plausible right? if you all know what you’re doing.

oh and using a 3 man group is more risky but smaller loss to cover pot of 1.5G and so with someone in first at all it really reduces the loss because its 1.4G and getting 2nd or 3rd will give a small gain

tell me how it goes. and yea (when i’m online anyways lol)

1. On average, that won’t make a difference at all.
2. For this to work, people would have to stick around after their 3 wins until the last guy got their 3 wins, so it won’t be quicker either.

I can see the merits in this idea. You are trying to guarantee the 6s loss among 5 friends, instead of 1 person losing a lot and another winning a lot for the chieve. It makes sense if everyone sticks around for 3 wins for everyone (I would say each person bet on the same moa each time), and people KNOW they are going to be losing around a gold.

On a solo betting basis, some will end up ahead and some will end up behind, but the average over all betters will still be a 6s loss. The number of races needed to get the chieve will be exactly the same. So all this is doing is sharing the guaranteed loss.

wintermute.4096:

1. On average, that won’t make a difference at all.
2. For this to work, people would have to stick around after their 3 wins until the last guy got their 3 wins, so it won’t be quicker either.

It’s not about quicker, its about less loss in total for the group, even if its for only 3 rounds if 1 guy finishes first, which can be useful for those that can’t get a break and win these things and do not have a lot of gold to spare trying. the difference would be the achievement points if you want it
I did specify this makes no profit,

and the idea was more of a concept of using the total possible winnings and betting amount to lower losses rather then lose 10 gold, and then get 3 wins.

and i think the last guy to stick around is a bit better because after all his losses as his friends got the points already he only lost about the amount of 1-2 bets rather then with the idea of the last guy, with him being last meaning he probably lost a lot so if alone he’d lose a lot more.

and about quickness, its not quick for some people to get 3 wins either, in the group at least some people will get it.

again its idea of bet cost to profit amount and how to lower losses in order to just try to get 3 wins

Lauranda.1342:

I can see the merits in this idea. You are trying to guarantee the 6s loss among 5 friends, instead of 1 person losing a lot and another winning a lot for the chieve. It makes sense if everyone sticks around for 3 wins for everyone (I would say each person bet on the same moa each time), and people KNOW they are going to be losing around a gold.

On a solo betting basis, some will end up ahead and some will end up behind, but the average over all betters will still be a 6s loss. The number of races needed to get the chieve will be exactly the same. So all this is doing is sharing the guaranteed loss.

I rather share a guaranteed loss to help a friend, and since I lose the betting I didn’t lose that much. Also using the 4 person method, it has no loss if you get 1st and 2nd its 4, 1/5 chances to get first which would cover the betting amount. I plan to use the 4 person method when i get the chance

Like any other gambling system…the avg will will come out the same in the end. You just have to hope for a winning streak. Good luck on the 4-man system and I hope you get less 5th place finishes than not.

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

Onshidesigns.1069:

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

Still doesn’t work. What if you don’t get a winning streak? Long term this system doesn’t work.

Onshidesigns.1069:

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

You do realize that the probability for your “winning moa” to win again after its first win is the same than the one of your “2nd favorite moa” ?
As it has been said it is a very common misconception based on a misunderstanding of the way conditional probabilities work which is often reffered as gambler’s fallacy.

Minos.3450:

Onshidesigns.1069:

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

You do realize that the probability for your “winning moa” to win again after its first win is the same than the one of your “2nd favorite moa” ?
As it has been said it is a very common misconception based on a misunderstanding of the way conditional probabilities work which is often reffered as gambler’s fallacy.

It’s 20%, but over two races. That 20% is not likely to repeat itself.

Moa’s have 20% chance of winning 2 out of 10 races. But the odds that it will be consecutive is small.

Onshidesigns.1069:

Minos.3450:

Onshidesigns.1069:

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

You do realize that the probability for your “winning moa” to win again after its first win is the same than the one of your “2nd favorite moa” ?
As it has been said it is a very common misconception based on a misunderstanding of the way conditional probabilities work which is often reffered as gambler’s fallacy.

It’s 20%, but over two races that 20% is not likely to repeat itself.

Moa’s have 20% chance of winning 2 out of 10 races. But the odds that it will be consecutive is small.

Once again , that is why it’s called CONDITIONAL probabilities. The fact your moa have already won a race (or a thousand for what is matters) doesn’t impact in ANY way the result of the next race.

So yes the probability for a Moa to win 5 races in a row is very small but after he has already won 4 his probability to win a 5th is still 20 % : the same than every other Moa.

TLDR : you can’t judge on past results to forecast the outcome of the next race because every races are independent events.

Minos.3450:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Minos.3450:

Onshidesigns.1069:

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

You do realize that the probability for your “winning moa” to win again after its first win is the same than the one of your “2nd favorite moa” ?
As it has been said it is a very common misconception based on a misunderstanding of the way conditional probabilities work which is often reffered as gambler’s fallacy.

It’s 20%, but over two races that 20% is not likely to repeat itself.

Moa’s have 20% chance of winning 2 out of 10 races. But the odds that it will be consecutive is small.

Once again , that is why it’s called CONDITIONAL probabilities. The fact your moa have already won a race (or a thousand for what is matters) doesn’t impact in ANY way the result of the next race.

So yes the probability for a Moa to win 5 races in a row is very small but after he has already won 4 his probability to win a 5th is still 20 % : the same than every other Moa.

TLDR : you can’t judge on past results to forecast the outcome of the next race because every races are independent events.

It’s more of an educated guess based on past results. I’m not disagreeing the chances don’t chance. But I have been able stay near even with this tactic. It’s just knowing when to quit before your luck changes.

If Moa A is your favourite and Moa B is your second favourite, the cances of this sequence: A A A and this sequence: A A B happening are exactly the same.

People have cited the mathematical proof elsewhere in the forums on several occasions – you can believe us: *it doesn’t matter which moa you bet on. *

This is, unless ANet has implemented an algorithm that prevents the same moa winning several times in a row, but by doing so, they would harm their own goal of making this a money sink. (Plus, data by reddit users confirms that the same moa can win several games in a row.)

And lastly, there is no “luck”, and winning streak / losing streak (as well as their supposed ends) is just terms we apply AFTER the dice have been cast – they hold absolutely no value in trying to predict future outcomes.

The mechanic to determine which moa wins is always the same – each moa has a 20% chance. Every time.

Here’s a more in-depth explanation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

Onshidesigns.1069:

It’s more of an educated guess based on past results.

This is also due to a human error in perception.

If Motti wins 5 times in a row, you will remember, because it stands out as a result.

If the sequence goes Motti – Monna – Meep – Meep – Mystery Moa (in this precise order), then your brain won’t save the information as anything special.

But both sequences have exactly the same chance of happening. They are exactly equally rare.

Exactly because an educated guess would mean factoids leaning towards a certain guess. In this case it is all equally random. This is no hypothesus, no form of deduction, just a feeling of security to bet on a certain moa when it surfaces as the winner more frequently. can;t mix logic with emotion.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

This is, unless ANet has implemented an algorithm that prevents the same moa winning several times in a row, but by doing so, they would harm their own goal of making this a money sink. (Plus, data by reddit users confirms that the same moa can win several games in a row.)

How would it harm their goal? For every moa that wins, it gets broadcast in the map chat. So by implementing such algorithm, once the moa has been broadcast to have won 3 times in a row, the more likely that people will bet on the winning moa — then have the system sink all the money into a loss of that moa.

It’s a perfect system for the money sink goal.

Believing that each moa has a 20% chance of winning is also a Gambler’s Fallacy.

Watching the race closely shows that the 20% chance happens on the first half of the race, but towards the end, there’s a trigger that sends certain moa into overdrive and wins the race.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Believing that each moa has a 20% chance of winning is also a Gambler’s Fallacy.

Watching the race closely shows that the 20% chance happens on the first half of the race, but towards the end, there’s a trigger that sends certain moa into overdrive and wins the race.

Not sure what you are trying to claim here. If you are saying that the race favors a certain moa, then please be more specific. Otherwise, the fact that a “winner” is chosen by being given a speed boost doesn’t change the odds of winning, i.e. receiving the speed boost.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

How would it harm their goal?

With each bird having a 20% chance of winning, players are guaranteed to make a loss over time. It is the perfect money sink.

If there was any way a player could get an edge by devising any sort of strategy (be it “always bet on the same moa” or “never bet on the previous race’s winner” or whatever else), within days this strategy would be known to the community, through forum, wiki, reddit… players would start betting on the same bird and come out on top. It would no longer be a money sink. Or at the very least, less of a money sink.

Now the question is… why would ANet do that?

But with any gambling system, there will be people who think they’re smart enough to beat the system. And some are very good at detecting patterns (see also, the link I posted below). The only way for ANet to protect themselves from this is to make it strictly random.

(Well, that’s not actually true. The other thing they could do would be to see how many bets are on each moa, and determine the winner by choosing the one with the least bets, thus making sure to maximize the community’s total losses in gold. But that would be dirty, and I don’t believe they’d stoop so low.)

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Watching the race closely shows that the 20% chance happens on the first half of the race, but towards the end, there’s a trigger that sends certain moa into overdrive and wins the race.

They’re not actual moas and it’s not an actual race… or even a simulation of a race. The winner is pre-determined by “diceroll”, and then the animation for each bird “racing” is chosen accordingly. All of this happens before you see the moas even leave their pens.

We know this, because there is only a finite number of combinations that can happen for winner, second and third place. For instance, when Motti wins, Meep will come second. Please see this thread on reddit for evidence.

I hope this explains it.

Onshidesigns.1069:

Minos.3450:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Minos.3450:

Onshidesigns.1069:

marnick.4305:

Onshidesigns.1069:

Pick your two favorite moas
Main moa
2nd favorite moa
Don’t ever bet on another one
Always bet against your winning moa
Only bet on 2nd favorite moa after Main moa wins, then switch back to main moa.

This plan made me slightly more gold. At the very least you would break even.

And how would this system work? You do realize it’s one of the most common gambler’s fallacies?

You quit before you lose your winnings. This idea keep you near breaking even. When your on a winning streak you quit.

You do realize that the probability for your “winning moa” to win again after its first win is the same than the one of your “2nd favorite moa” ?
As it has been said it is a very common misconception based on a misunderstanding of the way conditional probabilities work which is often reffered as gambler’s fallacy.

It’s 20%, but over two races that 20% is not likely to repeat itself.

Moa’s have 20% chance of winning 2 out of 10 races. But the odds that it will be consecutive is small.

Once again , that is why it’s called CONDITIONAL probabilities. The fact your moa have already won a race (or a thousand for what is matters) doesn’t impact in ANY way the result of the next race.

So yes the probability for a Moa to win 5 races in a row is very small but after he has already won 4 his probability to win a 5th is still 20 % : the same than every other Moa.

TLDR : you can’t judge on past results to forecast the outcome of the next race because every races are independent events.

It’s more of an educated guess based on past results. I’m not disagreeing the chances don’t chance. But I have been able stay near even with this tactic. It’s just knowing when to quit before your luck changes.

Wow. This is why Anet (and casinos) loves the gambling. It makes them lots of money.

Technically, this makes them no money, but it does help to stabilize the game economy by being a gold sink. You can argue that the rich/normal coffers are both a source of revenue (from buying gems) and a gold sink (convert them to gems) and also by the AH fees of people buying normal coffers from others.

And I am happy to find people that understand probability (I swear before the next living story event we should hold a class on prob so hopefully less people rage over “I opened X thingys and didn’t get Y”).

Also I like the OPs strategy, especially if you have a close group of 5-10 people. I’ll just need to stick to my “sure fire, never lose strategy!”

Wallace MacBix.2089:

And I am happy to find people that understand probability (I swear before the next living story event we should hold a class on prob so hopefully less people rage over “I opened X thingys and didn’t get Y”).

Unfortunately, I think a lot of the rage comes not from lack of understanding of probability, but rather from belief that the probabilities are a lot better than they actually are.