97 attempts and counting to upgrade to R11

feanor70118

Even doing this in an instanced lair since conventional wisdom has it that such places and the siege training quest are the best places to avoid being robbed by the buggy RNG. This is disgusting and frustrating and I'm sick of the way that the RNG is the only real endgame opponent in NWO.

I have made the reasonable suggestion before that those of us who wish to avoid gambling with the broken RNG should simply have the option to bypass the RNG by using the number of preservation wards that would meet the RNG's supposed odds: 33 for an upgrade to rank 12, 20 for rank 11, and so on.

Commenters, please refrain from posting your "I got lucky with the RNG" stories. I don't care. People who've had a semester of economics or statistics and feel like patronizing me and all other readers by sharing something from your education, also please refrain. I've read it all before, I'm not impressed, I have more education in those areas than most and, again, I don't care.

loboguild

I would like to see this reworked in a way that unsuccessful attempts enhance the chances of a success in consecutive tries. Even if that means lowering the initial chance of success to have the same average % like before.

The easiest change however would be to let upgrades consume a flat amount of Wards. 25% = 4 Wards, 3% = 33 Wards. The server would still use the same amount of Wards, just without these frustrating deviations. I don't get why RNG in these areas is so important anyway. Can anybody enlighten me? Is it to make players rage and buy a Coal where it's mathematically not necessary. Or to make players buy ZEN in situations where they run out of Wards and can't use the exchange? Either way, it's stupid.​​

feanor70118

I agree that a flat number of preservation wards makes the most sense, but since the game is nominally free to play I think it should preserve a claim to that status by leaving the option for players to gamble. By all means, let us maintain the pretense that the tiny number of preservation and coalescent wards one gets from invoking are enough to build a character.

urabask

IMO at the very least any upgrade that has a better than 1% chance should be guaranteed to succeed at 100 preservation wards.

micky1p00

(btw reffering to "People who've had a semester of economics or statistics and feel like patronizing me and all other readers by sharing something from your education, also please refrain. I've read it all before, I'm not impressed, I have more education in those areas than most and, again, I don't care." and not the X wards)

hastur905

Well all I can say is I tried upgrading a r8 to r9, 25% chance, used 10 wards, no go, went bareback for 11th time, no go, 25% chance my kitten. But you don't see me posting to complain, well that was true until you posted first.

eion311

RNG is a cruel mistress, but Cryptic loves your money long time.

feanor70118

hastur905 said:

Well all I can say is I tried upgrading a r8 to r9, 25% chance, used 10 wards, no go, went bareback for 11th time, no go, 25% chance my kitten. But you don't see me posting to complain, well that was true until you posted first.

I applaud the moral superiority of the way you have remained strong and silent, and resolved to suffer unfairness without trying to change anything for the better.

feanor70118

magenubbie said:

feanor70118 said:

I have more education in those areas than most and, again, I don't care.

Good argument. Flawless. Can't see why the devs don't listen so someone as educated as yourself. How could you possibly be wrong about anything?
/sarcasm

I can only infer that my anticipation of either your I-got-lucky-with-the-RNG story or my anticipation of your I-will-now-patronize-you-with-my-thoughts-on-elementary-economics-or-statistics comment has hurt your feelings, and for that I apologize.

greywynd

If you have 5% chance of success, that means you have 95% chance of failure. These numbers exist in a vacuum. They are not dependent upon the prior attempt(s) you made.

urabask

greywynd said:

If you have 5% chance of success, that means you have 95% chance of failure. These numbers exist in a vacuum. They are not dependent upon the prior attempt(s) you made.

This doesn't mean that they shouldn't be. Every time a player takes 101+ wards for a one rank upgrade on an enchant they're that much closer to quitting. Cryptic knows that they have to work on player retention and making the refinement system less harsh is a perfect way to improve their player retention while not noticeably affecting their bottom line negatively in the short term.

oldbaldyone

feanor70118 said:

I have made the reasonable suggestion before that those of us who wish to avoid gambling with the broken RNG should simply have the option

You have the option to use a coal ward and avoid RNG entirely. Might not be the option you like, but its available.

They won't make it a set amount of pwards for an automatic upgrade without raising the cost for pwards, as it would reduce he chances of players buying cwards.

I'll agree the entire refinement systems needs a major overhaul. From the shear amount of RP items, to the refining process itself, to the visuals attached to enchants (so its coded deep in the enchant, so what?).

Anyways, sorry for your bad luck...interactions with the RNG gods.

oldbaldyone

feanor70118 said:

I have made the reasonable suggestion before that those of us who wish to avoid gambling with the broken RNG should simply have the option

You have the option to use a coal ward and avoid RNG entirely. Might not be the option you like, but its available.

They won't make it a set amount of pwards for an automatic upgrade without raising the cost for pwards, as it would reduce he chances of players buying cwards.

I'll agree the entire refinement systems needs a major overhaul. From the shear amount of RP items, to the refining process itself, to the visuals attached to enchants (so its coded deep in the enchant, so what?).

Anyways, sorry for your bad luck...interactions with the RNG gods.

vlek91

urabask said:

IMO at the very least any upgrade that has a better than 1% chance should be guaranteed to succeed at 100 preservation wards.

That's not how it works (100x 1% != 1x 100%), here check it out
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution

For 100 wards at 1% chance we have:
n = 100
k = 1
p = 0.01
q = 0.99 (also known as 1-p)
f(k;n,p) = {n!/[k!*(n-k)!]} * { [p^k]*[(1-p)^(n-k)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100!/[1!*(100-1)!]} * { [0.01^1]*[(1-0.01)^(100-1)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100} * {[0.01^1]*[0.99^99]}
f(k;n,p) = 0.36972963765
So, 100 wards give you a 36,97% chance of being sucessful

feanor70118

greywynd said:

If you have 5% chance of success, that means you have 95% chance of failure. These numbers exist in a vacuum. They are not dependent upon the prior attempt(s) you made.

What did I say about patronizing the reader with your comment on elementary statistics?

feanor70118

oldbaldyone said:

feanor70118 said:

I have made the reasonable suggestion before that those of us who wish to avoid gambling with the broken RNG should simply have the option

You have the option to use a coal ward and avoid RNG entirely. Might not be the option you like, but its available.

They won't make it a set amount of pwards for an automatic upgrade without raising the cost for pwards, as it would reduce he chances of players buying cwards.

I'll agree the entire refinement systems needs a major overhaul. From the shear amount of RP items, to the refining process itself, to the visuals attached to enchants (so its coded deep in the enchant, so what?).

Anyways, sorry for your bad luck...interactions with the RNG gods.

Look, every frakking time someone complains about the RNG here, someone mentions that coalescent wards exist. This is not news to anyone. What I'm trying to do is bring the devs' attention to a better idea than an RNG that does not work as advertised and is capable of going hugely wrong. With respect, if you don't have a helpful suggestion, why bother commenting?

However, to the content of your post, the idea that pwards should be more expensive in order for them to simply work as advertised would be a sort of admission that in fact the RNG is broken and would be a demand that we should pay more for the game to simply do what it says it does.

And, again, imagining some reason why Cryptic wouldn't want to do the obvious and fair thing isn't really helpful, either.

feanor70118

vlek91 said:

urabask said:

IMO at the very least any upgrade that has a better than 1% chance should be guaranteed to succeed at 100 preservation wards.

That's not how it works (100x 1% != 1x 100%), here check it out
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution

For 100 wards at 1% chance we have:
n = 100
k = 1
p = 0.01
q = 0.99 (also known as 1-p)
f(k;n,p) = {n!/[k!*(n-k)!]} * { [p^k]*[(1-p)^(n-k)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100!/[1!*(100-1)!]} * { [0.01^1]*[(1-0.01)^(100-1)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100} * {[0.01^1]*[0.99^99]}
f(k;n,p) = 0.36972963765
So, 100 wards give you a 36,97% chance of being sucessful

And again, what did I say about patronizing the reader with your comment on elementary statistics? Besides which, there's no reason to believe that Cryptic's RNG code works that way.

hastur905

@kreatyve just close this thread. It seems that Feanor is just a troll, their other thread on 5k missing HP has been closed for the same reason. He asks for help or comment but adds nothing to the conversation and just calls out responders.

feanor70118

hastur905 said:

@kreatyve just close this thread. It seems that Feanor is just a troll, their other thread on 5k missing HP has been closed for the same reason. He asks for help or comment but adds nothing to the conversation and just calls out responders.

Actually, you'll find that I've made a reasonable suggestion and am simply trying to keep the thread from veering off-topic in the often-demonstrated ways that RNG threads tend to do. My other thread was closed because the moderator assumed that I was offended for some reason, and for the reason that I should have posted it in bug reports (which makes sense). It is beyond me what positive thing could be accomplished by shutting down a thread that seeks to improve one of NWO's most glaring and longstanding problems, or by allowing that thread to fill up with tedious, off-topic and excruciatingly predictable nonsense.

kreatyve

feanor70118 said:

vlek91 said:

urabask said:

IMO at the very least any upgrade that has a better than 1% chance should be guaranteed to succeed at 100 preservation wards.

That's not how it works (100x 1% != 1x 100%), here check it out
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution

For 100 wards at 1% chance we have:
n = 100
k = 1
p = 0.01
q = 0.99 (also known as 1-p)
f(k;n,p) = {n!/[k!*(n-k)!]} * { [p^k]*[(1-p)^(n-k)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100!/[1!*(100-1)!]} * { [0.01^1]*[(1-0.01)^(100-1)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100} * {[0.01^1]*[0.99^99]}
f(k;n,p) = 0.36972963765
So, 100 wards give you a 36,97% chance of being sucessful

And again, what did I say about patronizing the reader with your comment on elementary statistics? Besides which, there's no reason to believe that Cryptic's RNG code works that way.

I'm pretty sure enough people have tested this to see that this is how it works. One of the devs explained it in simpler terms a while back, but I can't find it to dig it up now. Pretty sure this math is pretty accurate.

tostrek2012

"I'm pretty sure enough people have tested this to see that this is how it works. One of the devs explained it in simpler terms a while back, but I can't find it to dig it up now. Pretty sure this math is pretty accurate."

It would be much appreciated if you can quote the developer's explanation of the RNG.

vinceent1

they should do something with it. i remember long time ago, when i upgrading water of elahzad to legendary (my first low percentage upgrade). i use 102 wards before it was upgraded (10% was success rate). i was so scared of this that i almost quit the game and dont refine anything with such a low success rate for next 6 months, i dont upgrade anything under 20% success rate (rather keep it not upgraded)

kreatyve

tostrek2012 said:

"I'm pretty sure enough people have tested this to see that this is how it works. One of the devs explained it in simpler terms a while back, but I can't find it to dig it up now. Pretty sure this math is pretty accurate."

It would be much appreciated if you can quote the developer's explanation of the RNG.



I'll look for it, but I honestly don't remember if it was on here or on Reddit. It was quite a while ago.

ajlir

Then, it won't be in Bug Report section but player feedback section.

thefabricant

This isn't a bug report and so it should be moved to another section.

urabask

vlek91 said:

urabask said:

IMO at the very least any upgrade that has a better than 1% chance should be guaranteed to succeed at 100 preservation wards.

That's not how it works (100x 1% != 1x 100%), here check it out
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution

For 100 wards at 1% chance we have:
n = 100
k = 1
p = 0.01
q = 0.99 (also known as 1-p)
f(k;n,p) = {n!/[k!*(n-k)!]} * { [p^k]*[(1-p)^(n-k)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100!/[1!*(100-1)!]} * { [0.01^1]*[(1-0.01)^(100-1)]}
f(k;n,p) = {100} * {[0.01^1]*[0.99^99]}
f(k;n,p) = 0.36972963765
So, 100 wards give you a 36,97% chance of being sucessful

Is English your second language or something? I wasn't saying that's how it currently works. I was saying that they should make it work that way. It makes more sense to have a guaranteed success at 100 wards because it means that players aren't forced to gamble on preservation wards or use a coal ward on upgrades that really shouldn't need one. Plenty of other games have pity counters to keep players from getting burnt out because of bad luck.

mafesio

I think there should be a mercy cap of some sort. I understand if there is a 25% chance, that is 25% chance per attempt. So, yes it is possible to roll 100 times even at a 25% it's possible to fail everytime. Cyrptic can change the statistics, but there should be some mechanism to increase the chance based on tried attempts, if it's a 25% chance and let's say I try 4 times and fail, the system should start rasing the chance for success and I agree with a suggestion someone made earlier about a 100 preservation auto success, since 100 preservations is the same as a coal ward as far as price. Over the last 3 years I really haven't had some of the issues with the rng as some, not saying I get it in a first try, but I can only remember a couple of times where it seemed like it was a bit excessive for relatively large chance to succeed. As a business stand point, casinos don't give you sliding scale based on how much you spent, and even with 50/50 chance in a casino, house alway's wins. Either they should offer more p. wards as rewards or maybe even merchant somehwere in game where players can exchange 100 p. wards for a coalward if they feel there own luck is not working for them, or maybe have the ability to include gold and ad along with the p. ward to increase the chance to succeed, it would be another currency sink along with the p. wards and still wouldn't be guaranteed so the possiblity for chunks of currency to get eaten can't be bad for the economy either.

I hate the rng system personally, I have been playing 3 years and the highest enchant I have is a dark 10, and only one of them, artifact equipment is orange is the orginial artifiact equipment first introduced (No greater gear). I have orange stuff, i'll never see mythic. I focused on my Weapon and Armor enchantments. The rng system is a way to limit progression, if it was eaer to farm RP and if the RNG was better, I wouldn't actually play the game, I would be working to max out my gear. I don't live in NW because RL is very demanding and my girl for some reason I can't get to enjoy watching me play. But I do the dailies, I do pvps, I'm 3060 IL and I can do fine in both pvp and pve, for those of you who pvp I'm sure you seen my TR runiing around Mafein, I have some pretty good 1v1's with people 1200 IL greater than mine, of couse at 3060 there are some in pvp that I can't hurt. The PVE content dones't require anything over 3k. I have focused more on playing on learning my classes then worry about gear, I'm kinda glad at a certain point things become ridiculous as far as resources, time and money, because I would be inclined to farm RP and chance my luck with the RNG if it was easy, cheap, or quick. People worry to much about maxing out their gear, there is really no point unless you want to be in an end game PVP Guild. But I can promise you, my little freebie toon, has destroyed many wallet warriors that were maxed out. Gear can give you some major advantages of course, super tank, super dps, but it can only make up for so much as replacement for skill. I have been playing daily since the new mod after a little break, 40 days ago I started with a IL of 3050, today is 3060.

So if the RNG is to high, and the RP requirements are dropped, everyone will have r12's and mythic everything. My 3k tr might hold out again one 4.2k, but not 5. I would be forced instead of playing to farm RP to play the game. If everyone had 4.2k in a group for pve, and I had 3k, i'm not going to be in the party or invited, 5 4.2k players in pvp with my 3k, i might live, I might kill one, but i'd be running most the time. For the ones that are 4.2k, god bless you, you either have lived in NW since they turned the servers on or having plenty of money and are stuck in a wheelchair. It's a mystery to me in the first place why everyone is on the sole mission to get the highest IL possible, you don't need it in game, you can replace $$ with skill in PVP to an extent. They are making up for some deficiency in RL i would guess. Since the race to 4.2k is not even required, or the actual goal of the game. There should be bar to BIS, I don't care or need BIS gear, but obviously if everyone had BIS gear, I would be forced to myself.

It seems 3k is the gate for the endgame content now anyway. You should automatically get an increase in success rate if you are below the average of the server to keep the median IL easily accessible to both old and new players so the competition and difficutly can be distrubited in a more enjoyable way.

greywynd

But it is also a business. Improving the chances cuts down on the sale of coal wards.

kreatyve

Ok, here is a good analogy in common English of how the RNG currently works.

Let's say you have a box with 100 papers inside. 80 of the papers are white. 20 of the papers are red. (choose whatever colors don't offend you, whatever). If you draw a white paper, your refining fails. If you draw a red paper, your refining will succeed. You stick your hand in the box and draw a paper. If it's red, great, you got really lucky. If it's white - YOU PUT IT BACK IN THE BOX before drawing again. I think this is the part most people get confused on. If you were keeping that white piece of paper out of the box, your odds would improve greatly every time. However, that is not the case, and it may take you over 100 times in order to get that red piece of paper, because your odds are the same every single time.