test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

failure in refining

saini50990saini50990 Member Posts: 309 Arc User
edited February 2014 in PvE Discussion
hi guys,
today was refining radiant rank 6 to make rank 7 , i had 4 rank 6 enchants ready to upgrade ,i had 4 preservation wards and bought 20 more and the astonishing and sad thing is using all those wards i only got 2 rank 7 enchant which has success rate of 30% , i think cryptic has to give reason as to why i lost so many wards just to make 1 rank 7 with 30% success rate which means out of 10 wards i get 3 success.
Post edited by saini50990 on
«1

Comments

  • Options
    adinosiiadinosii Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 4,294 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    saini50990 wrote: »
    hi guys,
    today was refining radiant rank 6 to make rank 7 , i had 4 rank 6 enchants ready to upgrade ,i had 4 preservation wards and bought 20 more and the astonishing and sad thing is using all those wards i only got 2 rank 7 enchant which has success rate of 30% , i think cryptic has to give reason as to why i lost so many wards just to make 1 rank 7 with 30% success rate which means out of 10 wards i get 3 success.

    No, it does not mean that out of 10 wards you get 3 successes - a 30% success change basically means that on the average you would get 3 successes for 10 wards, but you might have gotten none (quite unlikely, but still possible) or 10 (very unlikely, but also possible.

    It is random.
    Hoping for improvements...
  • Options
    zargorius666zargorius666 Member Posts: 118 Bounty Hunter
    edited February 2014
    saini50990 wrote: »
    hi guys,
    today was refining radiant rank 6 to make rank 7 , i had 4 rank 6 enchants ready to upgrade ,i had 4 preservation wards and bought 20 more and the astonishing and sad thing is using all those wards i only got 2 rank 7 enchant which has success rate of 30% , i think cryptic has to give reason as to why i lost so many wards just to make 1 rank 7 with 30% success rate which means out of 10 wards i get 3 success.

    It doesn not work that way. That's the probability of having a success, 30 out of 100 tries. What it means is that still you might attempt to refine and fail 50 times in a row and there's nobody to blame.
  • Options
    wingedkagoutiwingedkagouti Member Posts: 275 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    It doesn not work that way. That's the probability of having a success, 30 out of 100 tries. What it means is that still you might attempt to refine and fail 50 times in a row and there's nobody to blame.
    100 tries is fairly likely to give 20 or 40 successes as well. Once you go up to 10000 tries you start having a very good chance at being within 29-31% success. And in 10000 tries you'll likely see at least one string of 10 successes and at least one string of 20 failures.

    But most people will see 30% chance to succeed and expect success on at least every 3rd try*, and be confused/angry when it doesn't work out that way. Players don't get to see the data for all the rng based calculations, which are very likely to show that a 30% chance does happen 30% of the time when considering the entire playerbase.

    *Simple math says 30% is aproximately 1/3rd and everyone wants to be a bit lucky: "I'm sure my lottery ticket will win."
  • Options
    krimbarbarrojakrimbarbarroja Member Posts: 125 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    100 tries is fairly likely to give 20 or 40 successes as well. Once you go up to 10000 tries you start having a very good chance at being within 29-31% success. And in 10000 tries you'll likely see at least one string of 10 successes and at least one string of 20 failures.

    But most people will see 30% chance to succeed and expect success on at least every 3rd try*, and be confused/angry when it doesn't work out that way. Players don't get to see the data for all the rng based calculations, which are very likely to show that a 30% chance does happen 30% of the time when considering the entire playerbase.

    *Simple math says 30% is aproximately 1/3rd and everyone wants to be a bit lucky: "I'm sure my lottery ticket will win."

    A little hard math is in order to explain the whole issue.

    Acording to OP, he had 24 wards, used them all, (thus failing 24 times) and got 2 successes. Success rate is 30%, AKA. 0.3.

    For a 70% failure rate, the chances of failing all the tries is: 0.7^26= 0,0093875 %

    The chance of having only 1 success is: 0,7^25*0,3*(26!/25!)=0,104%

    The chance of having 2 successes is: 0,7^24*0,3^2*(26!/24!*2!)=0,56%.

    The whole thing tallies almost 0,7%. While this is indeed a low chance, it is not really something extraordinary. With hundreds and hundreds of players refining their enchants, many of these instances are bound to happen.

    Random is random. And it is not always a good idea.
  • Options
    wingedkagoutiwingedkagouti Member Posts: 275 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    A little hard math is in order to explain the whole issue.

    Acording to OP, he had 24 wards, used them all, (thus failing 24 times) and got 2 successes. Success rate is 30%, AKA. 0.3.

    For a 70% failure rate, the chances of failing all the tries is: 0.7^26= 0,0093875 %

    The chance of having only 1 success is: 0,7^25*0,3*(26!/25!)=0,104%

    The chance of having 2 successes is: 0,7^24*0,3^2*(26!/24!*2!)=0,56%.

    The whole thing tallies almost 0,7%. While this is indeed a low chance, it is not really something extraordinary. With hundreds and hundreds of players refining their enchants, many of these instances are bound to happen.

    Random is random. And it is not always a good idea.
    To put this into perspective, my record for failing to open a single non-class skill node (75% chance of success = 25% chance to fail) is 7 tries in a row.

    0.25^7 = 0.000061 or 0.0061%

    It's only happened once to me, but something that unlikely will almost be guaranteed to happen multiple times once you get enough players.
  • Options
    qutsemniequtsemnie Member Posts: 419 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Seeing 7 1s in a row in this sequence length:
    1111111

    Is NOT the same probability of seeing 7 1s in a row in this sequence length:
    0010100111010110111101010100000010011111111001010010100010001000111011010100101101010110111110111



    I usually have to explain this to people in every mmo I play, but I think the nature kits actually does a good job of making it easy to understand.

    You can't just take all your results, toss out the vast majority of them, put a window around the results you want, and go that had a probability of .000061 of occuring. The probability of your next 7 kits not opening is .000061. The probability that there will be 7 kits that dont open in a row approaches 1 as the number of kits you open approaches infinity.
  • Options
    veramis1veramis1 Banned Users Posts: 191 Bounty Hunter
    edited February 2014
    Sometimes RNG code is messed up. And cryptic is king of messed up code. And it's not out of the question they ninja nerfed odds without changing the visible %, just like they ninja-nerf tarmalune droprate from boxes.
  • Options
    eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    veramis1 wrote: »
    Sometimes RNG code is messed up.

    No, it's not. RNG algorithms have been around for decades and Cryptic absolutely, positively DID NOT write their own RNG algorithms. Statistics is just something a majority of people fail to understand.
  • Options
    iuliandreiiuliandrei Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 143 Bounty Hunter
    edited February 2014
    It doesn not work that way. That's the probability of having a success, 30 out of 100 tries. What it means is that still you might attempt to refine and fail 50 times in a row and there's nobody to blame.

    Except for the guy who made this system and thought the possibility of failing 50 times on upgrading an enchant is resonable.
    100 tries is fairly likely to give 20 or 40 successes as well. Once you go up to 10000 tries you start having a very good chance at being within 29-31% success. And in 10000 tries you'll likely see at least one string of 10 successes and at least one string of 20 failures.

    But most people will see 30% chance to succeed and expect success on at least every 3rd try*, and be confused/angry when it doesn't work out that way. Players don't get to see the data for all the rng based calculations, which are very likely to show that a 30% chance does happen 30% of the time when considering the entire playerbase.

    That's the problem with RNG and people like you who want to give an explanation.
    You see when you try to deduce the chance of something, you're perfectly fine with doing it from a specific sample, but once know that value and someone tries to point out otherwise you will ALWAYS CLAIM THE SAMPLE ISN'T BIG ENOUGH.
    Numbers are irrelevant, if i can come and say i upgraded 1 million enchantments and got 70k upgrades with 20% chance you'll say i should upgrade 10 mil and the number will even out at 20 but IT WON'T, my enchantments don't have memory.
    Players don't get to see the data for all the rng based calculations, which are very likely to show that a 30% chance does happen 30% of the time when considering the entire playerbase.

    And this is what makes the whole thing freaking despicable.
  • Options
    zargorius666zargorius666 Member Posts: 118 Bounty Hunter
    edited February 2014
    iuliandrei wrote: »
    Except for the guy who made this system and thought the possibility of failing 50 times on upgrading an enchant is resonable.



    That's the problem with RNG and people like you who want to give an explanation.
    You see when you try to deduce the chance of something, you're perfectly fine with doing it from a specific sample, but once know that value and someone tries to point out otherwise you will ALWAYS CLAIM THE SAMPLE ISN'T BIG ENOUGH.
    Numbers are irrelevant, if i can come and say i upgraded 1 million enchantments and got 70k upgrades with 20% chance you'll say i should upgrade 10 mil and the number will even out at 20 but IT WON'T, my enchantments don't have memory.



    And this is what makes the whole thing freaking despicable.

    Then complain about the system, not the statistics :)
  • Options
    krimbarbarrojakrimbarbarroja Member Posts: 125 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Let me repeat what I said, at the risk of looking like an *** for quoting myself
    RNG is RNG. And it is not always a good thing.

    We have showed you that there is nothing "buggy" in what happenned to you. Does that mean that I agree with the system? ABSOLUTELY NOT!! Leaving everything in Goddess Luck's hand is a sure way to frustrate players, and should be avoided like the plague.

    I remember a TBS game where a unit had 50% chance of avoiding any attack. Do you think that the devs said "random is random"? No, they didn't. They made it so, after three hits or three misses, the next attack was a guaranteed miss or hit, correspondingly. Random? nope. Balanced, fun, and good? yup.
  • Options
    degraafinationdegraafination Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    RNGs are a beast. I refine a lot of R7s to R8s. I've had 6-7 successes in a row and 18-20 failures in a row.

    Over time, it evens out.
    PWP_zpsf8f711ce.jpg
    Join Essence of Aggression: PVP-ing Hard Since Beta!
  • Options
    krimbarbarrojakrimbarbarroja Member Posts: 125 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Over time, it evens out.

    Oh yes, absolutely. That is, unless it doesn't.
  • Options
    veramis1veramis1 Banned Users Posts: 191 Bounty Hunter
    edited February 2014
    eldarth wrote: »
    No, it's not. RNG algorithms have been around for decades and Cryptic absolutely, positively DID NOT write their own RNG algorithms. Statistics is just something a majority of people fail to understand.
    For context: Games use a lot of random numbers for things other than drops; for example when you blast one of those damned security cameras and a shower of sparks explodes out of it the each particle’s direction is determined by an RNG. Since games need a lot of RNG for effects and other things we actually have a very optimized RNG to make the game run quickly – the problem is you trade entropy (how random it is) for speed.

    https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/128402-rng-algorithm-bugschanges/
  • Options
    frariifrarii Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    I refuse to believe in maths, maths are evil and people who believe in science are minions of Satan, i just upgraded my Brutal from 8 to 9 at the very first try, it just shows that Moradin itself gave me his favor! and when that happens, the odds of success is always 100%, so when you fail at upgrading something is because your faith is not faithful enough!
  • Options
    charononuscharononus Member Posts: 5,715 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    frarii wrote: »
    I refuse to believe in maths, maths are evil and people who believe in science are minions of Satan, i just upgraded my Brutal from 8 to 9 at the very first try, it just shows that Moradin itself gave me his favor! and when that happens, the odds of success is always 100%, so when you fail at upgrading something is because your faith is not faithful enough!
    If you don't succeed at first sacrifice a halfling. That will give you the Dark Lord's favor. Oh wait wrong game.
  • Options
    ashnvfashnvf Member Posts: 294 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    eldarth wrote: »
    No, it's not. RNG algorithms have been around for decades and Cryptic absolutely, positively DID NOT write their own RNG algorithms. Statistics is just something a majority of people fail to understand.

    2 important points you are missing.

    1 - There are RNG applications and then there is the application of RNG. You need to properly seed, clear variables etc. It would not be unheard of to have bugs in the application of RNG such that you are repeating the same pseudorandom sequence over and over. Thus if your sequence happens to be one with no or below average high rolls, you will fall outside a proper distribution no matter what your sample size.

    2 - RNG is pseudorandom. Studies have been done where they were able to pick out patterns. Most properly designed games use failsafes for their "pseudorandom" rewards. Thus for each failure it increases the odds for the next roll, up till the point you succeed. Thus it sets a reasonable ceiling on failures.
  • Options
    ashnvfashnvf Member Posts: 294 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Let me repeat what I said, at the risk of looking like an *** for quoting myself



    We have showed you that there is nothing "buggy" in what happenned to you. Does that mean that I agree with the system? ABSOLUTELY NOT!! Leaving everything in Goddess Luck's hand is a sure way to frustrate players, and should be avoided like the plague.

    I remember a TBS game where a unit had 50% chance of avoiding any attack. Do you think that the devs said "random is random"? No, they didn't. They made it so, after three hits or three misses, the next attack was a guaranteed miss or hit, correspondingly. Random? nope. Balanced, fun, and good? yup.

    You have not shown anything. All you did was point out that it is not impossible for it to occur. Unless you looked through their code and saw that there were no uninitialized variables, improper seeded, etc etc you have not proven that it wasn't a bug.

    To be honest, using pseudorandom number generators without a failsafe is "buggy".

    Think about for a sec. Proper game design that allows a 70% chance of success should be designed around a normal sample size that any player will encounter. What I mean is, no one except bots refine 1M items. So who cares if it's a 70% success over 1M. What I do care about is how likely is it for me to get 0% success over a normal sample size of 10.

    That is where a failsafe comes in. As a game designer, do you really want folks to get 0 successes out of 10 tries when something has a 70% chance for success? Yes mathematically that is possible even with a perfect true random number generator, but that is not a proper design.
  • Options
    calvin1tagcalvin1tag Member Posts: 322 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    All I know is the random chance is a huge money maker for them I have spent hundreds of dollars on Preservation wards since I started playing this game somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 to 5 I'd think. I have gone 40+ tries with out success on some items.
  • Options
    everwherebuthereeverwherebuthere Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    saini50990 wrote: »
    hi guys,
    today was refining radiant rank 6 to make rank 7 , i had 4 rank 6 enchants ready to upgrade ,i had 4 preservation wards and bought 20 more and the astonishing and sad thing is using all those wards i only got 2 rank 7 enchant which has success rate of 30% , i think cryptic has to give reason as to why i lost so many wards just to make 1 rank 7 with 30% success rate which means out of 10 wards i get 3 success.
    Last time (just this week) I upgraded a radiant rank 6 to a rank 7, I used 21 Preservations Wards. So that means 22 attempts, 1 success preceded by 21 consectutive failures. 30% success rate my @##. Something tells me the published success rate tooltips are now incorrect. (That is PC for saying: something tells me that they severly nerfed the success rates, without changing the published notes, in order to sell us more Zen.)
  • Options
    cdnbisoncdnbison Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 806 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    I picked up a couple hundred preservation wards when they were half-price. Happy I did, and wish I would have picked up more...

    That being said, I've made a rank 8 (20%) in one shot, while wasting a dozen wards to get a rank 6 made. Sometimes, the RNG isn't your friend. Other days, you can't miss. You never hear about the people telling you how *they* had a great run of luck, though. What you usually hear is "My guildie..." followed by some exceptionally low-chance thing happening (say, getting an Eye of Lathandar in back-to-back runs), or getting the CTA companion on their first skirmish.
  • Options
    beckylunaticbeckylunatic Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 14,231 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Most of my upgrades lately have been 6s to 7s... holdovers from before I realized that you can right now outright buy rank 7s for less than the cost of the marks for upgrading, sometimes. Most of them go on the first or second try.

    The RNG loooooooves me. Or I am really good at massaging it into doing what I want, even though people say that's impossible.

    Gambler's Fortune: better than you thought.
    Guild Leader - The Lords of Light

    Neverwinter Census 2017

    All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
  • Options
    saini50990saini50990 Member Posts: 309 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    let take all ur maths seriously ok
    i had 26 turns on my refinement, 24 failure and 2 success, the 1st success came at 12 turn and the 2nd at 25th turn and now look at my chances. the chance of me failing 11 times in a row = .7^11=.0198=1.98%
    the chance of success on 12th turn = .7^11*.3=.00594=.594%
    the chance of me having the whole thing happening to me =.7^24*.3^2=1.72*10^(-5)=.00172%
    and if we go as avg =2/26=.0769or 7.69% was my success rate
    so u saying that it is 1 of those days in which the RNG screwed up and i lost near about 100k on refining.
    and the guys who saying that overall success rate is still 30% , u see if the data is to take in 1million data points than that is just messed up , except the farmers nobody refine that many enchants, so either they shld change the code of there rng to be fair or they can add an or statement to the code in 10 data points which will make atleast fix success rate for play so that ppl will not get that many failures.
    at least i want my success % to be shown in 10 tries and not to think what if its on overall players , y do i care about overall players , i m spending the money so i shld hell get the result too.
  • Options
    charononuscharononus Member Posts: 5,715 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    saini50990 wrote: »
    let take all ur maths seriously ok
    i had 26 turns on my refinement, 24 failure and 2 success, the 1st success came at 12 turn and the 2nd at 25th turn and now look at my chances. the chance of me failing 11 times in a row = .7^11=.0198=1.98%
    the chance of success on 12th turn = .7^11*.3=.00594=.594%
    the chance of me having the whole thing happening to me =.7^24*.3^2=1.72*10^(-5)=.00172%
    and if we go as avg =2/26=.0769or 7.69% was my success rate
    so u saying that it is 1 of those days in which the RNG screwed up and i lost near about 100k on refining.
    and the guys who saying that overall success rate is still 30% , u see if the data is to take in 1million data points than that is just messed up , except the farmers nobody refine that many enchants, so either they shld change the code of there rng to be fair or they can add an or statement to the code in 10 data points which will make atleast fix success rate for play so that ppl will not get that many failures.
    at least i want my success % to be shown in 10 tries and not to think what if its on overall players , y do i care about overall players , i m spending the money so i shld hell get the result too.
    Problem is that the failures make them money, you won't get % rigging. This is why I mourn the decline in subscription based games. You had to pay a sub, but they didn't feature systems designed to annoy you.
  • Options
    lazureelazuree Member Posts: 52 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    tbh it's really all about rng
    I bought a stack of r5 radiants yesterday and made 2 r7 radiants w/o consuming any pres wards
    however, when i tried to make a r8 i had the worst luck
    RNG: sometimes it loves us and sometimes it likes to laugh in your face
  • Options
    lucifron44lucifron44 Member Posts: 417 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    saini50990 wrote: »
    why i lost so many wards

    Last week I needed seven preservation wards for a 50% upgrade. I could not believe my eyes. It was fail after fail after fail.
    Russian leaderboard first page. The proof.
  • Options
    mconosrepmconosrep Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    lucifron44 wrote: »
    Last week I needed seven preservation wards for a 50% upgrade. I could not believe my eyes. It was fail after fail after fail.

    Meh, I once went through almost 30 skill kits on one node. The chances of that are ridiculously low....
  • Options
    loxxxyloxxxy Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    I've had it fail 6 times in a row with 85% chance. Of course not using a ward. I also sent through a stack of 20 lessers trying to upgrade a rune to Rank 6. It just doesn't work like that. Random is random and random cannot be anything but random :)
  • Options
    veramis1veramis1 Banned Users Posts: 191 Bounty Hunter
    edited February 2014
    loxxxy wrote: »
    I've had it fail 6 times in a row with 85% chance. Of course not using a ward. I also sent through a stack of 20 lessers trying to upgrade a rune to Rank 6. It just doesn't work like that. Random is random and random cannot be anything but random :)

    Sigh, can people actually read the posts before posting?
  • Options
    akemnosakemnos Member Posts: 597 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    What everyone doesn't seem to realize is that to upgrade the enchantment it is a single 30% chance. It doesn't matter how many times you try since each attempt is completely independent of the others.

    Each attempt has a 30% chance to successfully upgrade the enchantment. if you fail or succeed on the first attempt the next one is still 30% to upgrade.
Sign In or Register to comment.