+1% Crit Arrow Myth
Comments
-
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »Sorry, how do we know that? Do you have some info to validate this?
My data backs my position up.
Where's your data to counter it?[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »My data backs my position up.
Where's your data to counter it?
LOL, you are right I don't have any data. However, I cannot confirm your data is legit either.
You are saying
"It's a set percentage that doesn't change unless you equip something that increases it, or gain enough dex to increase it."
Look at it this way:
"if" your statement is true "and" your experiment was done correctly, then I would have to agree with your results or I'll have to make my research to deny yours.
Now look a this way:
"If" your statement is true, "and" your experiment was done correctly, then you simply had bad results (or your experiment was done wrong, sorry). Because the character window in which you see your actual crit% is a "report sheet" (not a calculation sheet). Those are the numbers that your character is supposed to have.
I don't see why a character would have two crit%, one on the report window and another one for the real performance. Of course, unless there is bug somewhere.
Still, your data does not demostrate your statement.0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »LOL, you are right I don't have any data. However, I cannot confirm your data is legit either.
You are saying
"It's a set percentage that doesn't change unless you equip something that increases it, or gain enough dex to increase it."
Look at it this way:
"if" your statement is true "and" your experiment was done correctly, then I would have to agree with your results or I'll have to make my research to deny yours.
Now look a this way:
"If" your statement is true, "and" your experiment was done correctly, then you simply had bad results (or your experiment was done wrong, sorry). Because the character window in which you see your actual crit% is a "report sheet" (not a calculation sheet). Those are the numbers that your character is supposed to have.
I don't see why a character would have two crit%, one on the report window and another one for the real performance. Of course, unless there is bug somewhere.
Still, your data does not demostrate your statement.
Evasion is a non-percentage number.
Accuracy is a non-percentage number.
Armor is a non-percentage number that is put into a formula to determine DR against mobs your level which means it uses a formula.
When you view a mob, you can see your dodge rate which is calculated using your Evasion number, and you can see your Hit% which is also calculated using your Accuracy number, and it is based on the mob being targeted.
The only number you don't see is Crit% because it's a set % that doesn't change.
That's using logic, obviously.
One of my next tests was going to be one shotting level 1 mobs.
If you want to refute my data, collect your own, or stop talking.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »Evasion is a non-percentage number.
The only number you don't see is Crit% because it's a set % that doesn't change.
That's using logic, obviously.
.
Now you changed, you said the statement was true because of your results. Now it is true because we cannot see it per mob?0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »Now you changed, you said the statement was true because of your results. Now it is true because we cannot see it per mob?
No, I've said the entire time it's because it's a set percentage.
You brought up the possibility of it being formula based, and I used logic to point out how it can't be formula based and is a set % instead.
Now, until you do something beyond blow smoke, I'm done with you.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »No, I've said the entire time it's because it's a set percentage.
You brought up the possibility of it being formula based, and I used logic to point out how it can't be formula based and is a set % instead.
Now, until you do something beyond blow smoke, I'm done with you.
That's fine with me. All I say for your results being valid, the statement has to be true and I think you believe that too since you will do more tests.
If your statement is true and you did a good sampling, there is no need to do more tests.0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »That's fine with me. All I say for your results being valid, the statement has to be true and I think you believe that too since you will do more tests.
If your statement is true and you did a good sampling, there is no need to do more tests.
I'm not just trying to prove a theory of mine, I'm trying to disprove a myth.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »I'm not just trying to prove a theory of mine, I'm trying to disprove a myth.
that's nice and I know the feeling. I had it when I was younger but no anymore. I just watch from the sidelines.
I hope you get your results.0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »that's nice and I know the feeling. I had it when I was younger but no anymore. I just watch from the sidelines.
I hope you get your results.
Not really young; just bored, and it's something to do. *sigh*[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
Psynopsis - Heavens Tear wrote: »*snip*You wish it was only a 9th grade math class. To give you a little background, I took both AP Calc AB and AP Calc BC and got 5's on both, and now I'm taking AP Statistics. So I know what I'm talking about.
And if you don't know what AP tests are, here's a little background information:*snip*Long story short, those 5's I got on the AP tests are the equivalent of an A in a first-year college-level Calculus course, both semesters.
If my memory serves, back when I did first year calculus we only did stuff like Central Limit Theorem, reading a table for a normal distribution, a brief look at other distributions such as Poisson, cdf's and pdf's, and that was about it.
I don't think I'd done anything involving confidence intervals and the like, which we were talking about, until I'd done a second year stats course.
Of course, I'm not a statistician, I'm a physicist, so I've never done much in the way of statistics, rather it's been calculus in general0 -
If my memory serves, back when I did first year calculus we only did stuff like Central Limit Theorem, reading a table for a normal distribution, a brief look at other distributions such as Poisson, cdf's and pdf's, and that was about it.
I don't think I'd done anything involving confidence intervals and the like, which we were talking about, until I'd done a second year stats course.
Of course, I'm not a statistician, I'm a physicist, so I've never done much in the way of statistics, rather it's been calculus in general
i wana be a physicist
0 -
Solandri - Heavens Tear wrote: »Look, I certainly don't want to discourage you. Someone who's able to get 5's in those AP courses has a bright future ahead. So don't take our criticism too harshly. But you still have a lot to learn about statistics. Take it from someone who's had grad school courses in it at MIT.
It's a very fun and very applicable topic. But a lot of the stuff you learn early on is simplified or limited in scope to make the math easier to deal with.
Normal (gaussian) distributions are just the tip of the iceberg. There are lots of other probability distribution functions. When you learn about erf, then the universe will seem on the verge of making complete sense. Until it all comes crashing down when you learn that erf can't be solved (so far), only approximated or solved numerically with a computer.
Since the crit/no crit values are binary, the relevant probability distribution in this case is a binomial distribution, which is what jemima used.
That was the whole point of everything Jemima and I posted. The numbers we gave were calculations of how likely it was that the observed critical rate corresponded to the actual critical rate. Since the calculated margin of error was less than half a percent for the 6700 sample case, we deemed it reliable (for a 95% confidence). The ~1000 sample cases are very close to reliable. You should learn how to calculate these in your college-level statistics courses (the grad-level courses will teach you how to derive the formulae used to calculate them).
There's no shame in not knowing this stuff yet. We all had to learn it at some point (well, those of us crazy enough to take it). Like I said, you have a bright future ahead. Just understand that there's a lot more out there than what you've learned so far.
MIT!?b:shocked You win.0 -
Speaking of which, jemima, i'm going over those right now in my statistics class...0
-
Seriously you guys... you havent even figured out if the arrow works on bows and I'm quite curious if it does. I'll help chip in some Crit arrows for someone to test with a bow(on HT) b:surrender0
-
Obsessed - Heavens Tear wrote: »Seriously you guys... you havent even figured out if the arrow works on bows and I'm quite curious if it does. I'll help chip in some Crit arrows for someone to test with a bow(on HT) b:surrender
I didn't think that even mattered since only archers use bows, and they constantly state they wouldn't ever use the arrows anyway...just sayin'[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »I didn't think that even mattered since only archers use bows, and they constantly state they wouldn't ever use the arrows anyway...just sayin'
Incorrect. Solo Blademasters use bows too to lure mobs.0 -
Oldbear - Sanctuary wrote: »Incorrect. Solo Blademasters use bows too to lure mobs.
LIES! I never use a bow on my barb to pull mobs ever.
*hides the bow*
eva!!!
...and I meant in continuous use where it would actually make a difference...like archers do... b:pleased[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
My theory is that no one here knows what they are talking about because everyone see's the large posts, doesn't give enough of a care to read it [after all, who in their right minds would?], and just says the preceding post is either correct or incorrect [there is a 50% chance they choose the preceding post is right, as well as a 50% chance to say the preceding post is wrong. Given a 95% (whatever that acronym was), we can safely assume no one gives a damn anyways so we end up basing it upon our mood whether or not the preceding post is right or wrong]. Following the decision of whether or not the preceding post is wrong [calculated out by my amazing math formula preceding this sentence], they then write their very own long post where the following person can do the same damn thing to them. This is my theory and it is good.
PS - Is there really a spoon?0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote:I didn't think that even mattered since only archers use bows, and they constantly state they wouldn't ever use the arrows anyway...just sayin'
Well true, but if the arrow doesnt even work on bows, it could just be bugged in general.0 -
everyone is taking the math way beyond a level that is unneeded.. its really quite simple..
Char with 2%crit rate
2% chance to crit per hit
98% chance to hit (or miss depending on mobs eva etc)
if the char has 3% crit, each hit has 3%chance to crit and 97% to be hit/miss
its based per hit, so in theroy you can have 15 crits in a row, or you can have 100000 hits with no crits..
its PER HIT there is no counter saying 2 out of every 100 have to be crits if its 2%.. its 2% every hit is the chance of a crit..
so stop trying to be uber by posting far fetched math that in reality means nothing..
now, weither or not the arrow actually works, youll be hardpressed to know, its based per hit.
examples are with 2%crit
RIGHT WAY
(example of hit chart)
hit1: 2/100 chance to crit
hit2: 2/100 chance to crit
hit3: 2/100 chance to crit (CRITS!)
hit4: the same 2/100 chance to crit
etc...
WRONG WAY
the way you guys are saying it, is as if you must crit the % per total number which is FALSE you graph would look like this
hit1: 2/100 chance to crit
hit2: 2/99 chance to crit (CRITS!)
hit3: 1/98 chance to crit
hit4: 1/97 chance to crit.
yes it would make it be 2% total out of 100, but thats NOT the way the crit works.0 -
Obsessed - Heavens Tear wrote: »Well true, but if the arrow doesnt even work on bows, it could just be bugged in general.
I'm currently making Elite Wolf Fang arrows to throw away later. Oh well. <.<Marutah - Harshlands wrote: »everyone is taking the math way beyond a level that is unneeded.. its really quite simple..
Char with 2%crit rate
2% chance to crit per hit
98% chance to hit (or miss depending on mobs eva etc)
if the char has 3% crit, each hit has 3%chance to crit and 97% to be hit/miss
its based per hit, so in theroy you can have 15 crits in a row, or you can have 100000 hits with no crits..
I'm not doing theorycraft.
I'm using real numbers.
What part of this do you not understand?
Or are you basing your post on those that are doing the probability mathematics?
Are you trying to tell us something we already know? If so, then we already know that, but I do have a question for you: If, out of 10000 spell attacks I actually get 296 crits, and my crit chance was 3%, what does that tell you?
What if out of 10k spell attacks I had 413 crits and my crit rate was 4%, what does that tell you?
No, I haven't done 10k spell attacks, but, hypothetically speaking, if I had, what conclusion would you draw?its PER HIT there is no counter saying 2 out of every 100 have to be crits if its 2%.. its 2% every hit is the chance of a crit..
No one said out of 100.
People did say out of several thousand.so stop trying to be uber by posting far fetched math that in reality means nothing..
Get out of my thread with that rubbish. Probability isn't "far fetched", and means a whole lot more than you apparently realize.now, weither or not the arrow actually works, youll be hardpressed to know, its based per hit.
examples are with 2%crit
WRONG
Melee attacks should be based on per attack, or so I've found. I'm still checking, but I can almost say with a certainty that it's a one roll system. Further, the numbers you see on the mob look to be rounded off for the display, but for the purposes of the hit/miss/crit roll they are probably either slightly higher or lower than shown making the only number that won't change is the crit % since that is a base of 1% with 1%/20 dex and equip increases which are (haven't seen any that aren't) also in whole percentages.RIGHT WAY
(example of hit chart)
hit1: 2/100 chance to crit
hit2: 2/100 chance to crit
hit3: 2/100 chance to crit (CRITS!)
hit4: the same 2/100 chance to crit
etc...
WRONG WAY
the way you guys are saying it, is as if you must crit the % per total number which is FALSE you graph would look like this
hit1: 2/100 chance to crit
hit2: 2/99 chance to crit (CRITS!)
hit3: 1/98 chance to crit
hit4: 1/97 chance to crit.
yes it would make it be 2% total out of 100, but thats NOT the way the crit works.
Excuse me, but my numbers, taken from the game itself, show that the number of crits over thousands of spells cast is very close to the crit rate shown on the character sheet coming within thousands of a point. Further I've found that as you keep adding more and more spell casts the percentage of crits will come closer and closer to the expected crit rate. It could take thousands of attacks for the curve to flatten out (which is why crit intensive builds are bursty), but it will flatten out, and it will take a lot to move the curve measurable.
That isn't math.
That is the hard numbers.
In the end, the casual observer cannot tell the difference between 2% and 3%, but when you take the numbers and study them you can tell the difference between 2% and 3%. Most players couldn't actually tell you if the arrows do or do not work, they simply believe they do because that's what everyone says. It's just an opinion that they do, but when I can equip a Christmas Blessing and get a 5% crit rate with my venomancer while firing spell after spell, unequip it, equip the crit arrow, and repeat that and get 4% crit rate after firing spell after spell after spell that tells me that it does nothing. When I can equip a Christmas Bless and a crit arrow and get ~5% crit rate when 6% is expected I can say the arrow does nothing.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
Marutah - Harshlands wrote: »everyone is taking the math way beyond a level that is unneeded.. its really quite simple..
Char with 2%crit rate
2% chance to crit per hit
98% chance to hit (or miss depending on mobs eva etc)
if the char has 3% crit, each hit has 3%chance to crit and 97% to be hit/miss
its based per hit, so in theroy you can have 15 crits in a row, or you can have 100000 hits with no crits..
its PER HIT there is no counter saying 2 out of every 100 have to be crits if its 2%.. its 2% every hit is the chance of a crit..
so stop trying to be uber by posting far fetched math that in reality means nothing..
now, weither or not the arrow actually works, youll be hardpressed to know, its based per hit.
examples are with 2%crit
RIGHT WAY
(example of hit chart)
hit1: 2/100 chance to crit
hit2: 2/100 chance to crit
hit3: 2/100 chance to crit (CRITS!)
hit4: the same 2/100 chance to crit
etc...
WRONG WAY
the way you guys are saying it, is as if you must crit the % per total number which is FALSE you graph would look like this
hit1: 2/100 chance to crit
hit2: 2/99 chance to crit (CRITS!)
hit3: 1/98 chance to crit
hit4: 1/97 chance to crit.
yes it would make it be 2% total out of 100, but thats NOT the way the crit works.
That's exactly my point. For his experiment to prove anything the percentage must not be a chance.
I do ignore if it is a chance or not, developers can confirm that or more testing from him.
However, he is very confident is not a chance as he has replied me couple times that is not a chance (and he gets irritated if you say otherwise. So, stop posting it is a chance).
I also see another problem. Is the percentage based on conected hits or in all your hits (including misses)?0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »That's exactly my point. For his experiment to prove anything the percentage must not be a chance.
I do ignore if it is a chance or not, developers can confirm that or more testing from him.
However, he is very confident is not a chance as he has replied me couple times that is not a chance (and he gets irritated if you say otherwise. So, stop posting it is a chance).
I also see another problem. Is the percentage based on conected hits or in all your hits (including misses)?
Let's say you roll a 6 sided dice. Each side has the same chance to come up on any one roll which doesn't change from roll to roll meaning it stays the same. However, over the course of many many rolls because each side has the same chance to come up there should be an even distribution (or nearly) of all the numbers that could come up. In the game, instead of rolling a d6 a d100 is being rolled, and instead of one number, a range of numbers is what is wanted (the crit range) which will be a percentage of the numbers rolled.
If you roll a d6, and track the number of times it comes up 1 or 5, then the number of times it comes up as a 1 or a 5 should be, roughly, 1/3 of the total rolls. That's just theoretical. Much the same, I can theorize that with a x% crit rate that out of 10k attacks that, roughly, x% of them will be crits. What I am doing is seeing if that is, in fact, the case.
Look, if you don't believe me, run the numbers yourself, and by that I mean get a pen and paper, and track your characters crits/non-hits/misses for an extended period of time.
I've been watching the numbers accumulate for sometime now, and they all say the same thing.
BTW, if I was using a sample size of 100, I would agree that nothing could be determined since chance is at play, but the simple fact is, I'm not.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
Marutah - Harshlands wrote: »98% chance to hit (or miss depending on mobs eva etc)
.
I also agree that it depends on the mob but I cannot confirm or prove.
For me it makes sence that you can expect more critical hits on lower level mobs than higher levels.0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »I also agree that it depends on the mob but I cannot confirm or prove.
For me it makes sence that you can expect more critical hits on lower level mobs than higher levels.
If that's your theory, then go prove it.
edit::
Ive been checking the Miss/Crit/Hit with my venomancer (foxform - she's a heavy arcane build) on mobs half her level (Frail Blobs) and over a span of 6888 attacks (misses included) she's showing a crit rate of 5.111% with the Christmas Blessing and a miss rate of 5%. Early on the crits did spike up to 6%, but as the numbers piled up it dropped down to ~5% where it's stayed over the last ~4000 attacks.
This has a couple implications:
1.) that there is a one roll system in place.
2.) level difference doesn't make the crit rate go up.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
omglazerz.. if what you claim to be true is true, then a crit% will be a constant.. (because you claim my %chance to crit per hit is false)
now if thats the case, that %crit is total with a large scale number.. i have 1 question.. what %is it taking it from?
its 2% crit is a static number like you claim, then out of 100 hits 2 should crit, out of 1000 20 should crit, and out of 10,000 200 of them should be crits..
that is what YOU ARE saying.. you give your big numbers, and all that does is say you wasted a grip of time testing a logicaly unsound theroy.
the % of crit is based per hit, and each time a new hit is being registered the same roll happens. the first hit has 2% chance to crit, and the 2nd hit has the same 2% chance to crit.
i know you like to think that its not 'chance' to crit, but that what %crit means.
find someone with 10%.. every hit will have a 1 in 10 chance to crit.. its NOT out of 1000 hits 100 will crit..
thats why you can get back to back crits, or go on 4000 long sprees with no crits.. ITS BASED PER HIT accept it, stop trying to be fancy by throwing around oldschool math to makeyourself sound smart with big numbers.. its alot easier then your trying to make it. stop overthinking and look at it the way it really is
also to quote youWhen you view a mob, you can see your dodge rate which is calculated using your Evasion number, and you can see your Hit% which is also calculated using your Accuracy number, and it is based on the mob being targeted.
The only number you don't see is Crit% because it's a set % that doesn't change.
That's using logic, obviously.
You brought up the possibility of it being formula based, and I used logic to point out how it can't be formula based and is a set % instead.
you didnt use logic at all, if anything all your saying with this statment is that
Since its not in the mob window
its a fixed precentage..
so using your 'logic' anything not in the mob window is a fixed amount? theres so many flaws in your 'logic' statements its ammusing.. please i dont want to start a flame war, but honestly stop throwing around words you dont truly know the meaning of.0 -
Marutah - Harshlands wrote: »omglazerz.. if what you claim to be true is true, then a crit% will be a constant.. (because you claim my %chance to crit per hit is false)
now if thats the case, that %crit is total with a large scale number.. i have 1 question.. what %is it taking it from?
its 2% crit is a static number like you claim, then out of 100 hits 2 should crit, out of 1000 20 should crit, and out of 10,000 200 of them should be crits..
that is what YOU ARE saying.. you give your big numbers, and all that does is say you wasted a grip of time testing a logicaly unsound theroy.
the % of crit is based per hit, and each time a new hit is being registered the same roll happens. the first hit has 2% chance to crit, and the 2nd hit has the same 2% chance to crit.
i know you like to think that its not 'chance' to crit, but that what %crit means.
find someone with 10%.. every hit will have a 1 in 10 chance to crit.. its NOT out of 1000 hits 100 will crit..
thats why you can get back to back crits, or go on 4000 long sprees with no crits.. ITS BASED PER HIT accept it, stop trying to be fancy by throwing around oldschool math to makeyourself sound smart with big numbers.. its alot easier then your trying to make it. stop overthinking and look at it the way it really is
I want you to see something that will change you mind. This is taken from the data as it came in.
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/4259/critrate5.jpg
I can throw numbers at you all day long, but this is the way it is: over the long term you will see the crit rate show up. There is your proof.
387 crits over 7539 attacks
Perfectly logged with no mistakes.
Doubt me now?[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »If that's your theory, then go prove it.
edit::
Ive been checking the Miss/Crit/Hit with my venomancer (foxform - she's a heavy arcane build) on mobs half her level (Frail Blobs) and over a span of 6888 attacks (misses included) she's showing a crit rate of 5.111% with the Christmas Blessing and a miss rate of 5%. Early on the crits did spike up to 6%, but as the numbers piled up it dropped down to ~5% where it's stayed over the last ~4000 attacks.
This has a couple implications:
1.) that there is a one roll system in place.
2.) level difference doesn't make the crit rate go up.
What is the crit% shown on the stats of your character. 5% or 6%?0 -
Granrey - Sanctuary wrote: »What is the crit% shown on the stats of your character. 5% or 6%?
5% and over 7538 attacks including all hits and misses she hit a 5.01% crit rate.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]0 -
Frequency of crits over a long period of time, and Chance to crit (which is what the crit% is) are 2 diffrent things..
i think were both just taking the crit% as diffrent things..
i highly doubt the game devs made it so that 6221 hits was the equalizer in crit precentage calculations.. if its a static unchangeable number like you say, the precent should be present no matter the sample size.. be it 1million hits or 1000 hits..
and crit% being the chance per hit makes total sense, as you would be able to see the results as more random (ie: spiking up and down, just as your graph does)
if it was your way, the graph should have flattend out way earlier and never have gone above the listed %... make up all the fancy graphs and **** you want..
just because it looks pretty dosent make it correct.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 181.9K PWI
- 697 Official Announcements
- 2 Rules of Conduct
- 264 Cabbage Patch Notes
- 61K General Discussion
- 1.5K Quality Corner
- 11.1K Suggestion Box
- 77.4K Archosaur City
- 3.5K Cash Shop Huddle
- 14.3K Server Symposium
- 18.1K Dungeons & Tactics
- 2K The Crafting Nook
- 4.9K Guild Banter
- 6.6K The Trading Post
- 28K Class Discussion
- 1.9K Arigora Colosseum
- 78 TW & Cross Server Battles
- 337 Nation Wars
- 8.2K Off-Topic Discussion
- 3.7K The Fanatics Forum
- 207 Screenshots and Videos
- 22.8K Support Desk