Crippled Drop Rates?

"Wookiebush;c-1840564" wrote:
First off, I put 11% because I didn’t feel like putting the 11.52whatever that it calculated out to. Second, you don’t get to continue shifting the goal posts and changing the required time someone should record data. 3 weeks is sufficient time to calculate an average, sorry if you don’t like that. Third, lowering the drop rate of a critical character at a critical time has the intention of pressuring players to spend money. Raising drop rates during non critical times or of non-critical players so that everything averages out in the long run is not balanced RNG, it is predatory development. EA is a predatory company that uses predatory tactics and has 100% earned their title of Worst Company in America (two years in a row by the way). So hem and haw and deny all you want. You and the handful of others who feel like reality denial is a solution to problems won’t change the fact that things are what they are.

We're aware of the conspiracy theory.

Nobody has ever actually provided properly tracked, statistically significant data to support what you're saying.

Many tests have been done, over many periods of time. They have never indicated what you suggest. That's not being in denial. That's math.

There are always conspiracy theorists saying CG stealth lowers drop rates because EA is evil. But never any good, solid data for it. Yet there is often good data for the consistent 1/3. Three weeks from one person, a three figure data set, is not enough to debunk the five, six, seven figure data sets saying it's one in three.

The only "data" we've seen has dubious recording and no number of attempts attached.

"Wookiebush;c-1840474" wrote:
I’ve had a roughly 11% drop rate for the month of april on cantina. So far that’s 19 days worth of data. You telling me I’m going to make up the other 19% in 11 days? Because that’s not happening.

Statistics do not normalize, least of all over narrow time frames. They dilute, over extended periods of time. A one in three chance is a one in three chance. Which means in a relatively narrow span- like three weeks- it absolutely can roll worse than one in three, because it's random and every roll is independent.

Galaxy of Heroes uses actual randomness. (Or pseudorandomness, as there is no true random number generator, but close enough for government work.) Actual randomness feels nonrandom to humans, partly because we biologically suck at statistics, and partly because a lot of games do not use actual randomness. They use self-normalizing randomness or they're non-random. So if you miss, your odds of hitting next time go up to force you back to the designated 33%, or if you act, a bar behind the scenes increments 33% so that you'll get the event one time in three. Either because true randomness feels wrong to humans, or simply generates a less stable and more scummable play state than the designers would prefer.

Galaxy of Heroes does not do that. And yes, it feels wrong. Because dice are not predictable in the way we want them to be.