RNG? I think not

"Tharivol;948481" wrote:
...
And even though I've never spelled this out before, the same exact theory came from countless people both in my Guild and on Forums alike.

"Tharivol;948566" wrote:
...
Countless people came up with the exact theory, in different times, in different places, (and to be honest it is not about just this game either) and ...

I usually stay out of these debates because RNG is a frustrating lord and savior, and you can never convince somebody that the game is not out to get them once they've made up their minds. But just because you have not counted the number of people who share in your conspiracy theory does not mean that the population is too large to count. In fact, I would wager that we could count up the number of people in your guild (<50) + the number of people in this forum who adhere to this theory using fewer than 100 fingers and toes.

If what you say is true, then I propose this solution for you: farm up your Baze until you get close to promoting to the next star and the game "decides" to stop giving you Baze shards, and instead switches over to Shoretrooper. Now reap the profits of your ingenuity by collecting the non-stop cornucopia of Shoretrooper shards that the algorithm is forced to shower upon you.

By the way, RNG does not care that you are looking for a Health triangle and withholding it from you. The simple truth is that triangles don't drop as often as say, squares, diamonds, or circles. We have had numerous discussions about this in the forum. Some folks have even calculated drop rates for each shape based on actual empirical data (shocking, I know). You can find the numbers if you look for them.

Big Brother is not out to get you. RNGesus is. You can improve your odds by burning incense during gaming, kissing the screen before rolling, and by rubbing the bald head of a stranger on Sunday morning.

"leef;948645" wrote:
@Tharivol
during the course of my "swgoh carreer" i've farmed quite alot of characters and gear, yet i've only noticed myself noticing worse drops just before an unlock/star up etc. not nearly as often. So it's easy for me to assume it's my mind playing tricks on me, wich is also far more likely than the game being coded to drop less when needed most.

As I said, I am not suggesting that there "is" some code like that mate. I am suggesting that there can very well be such codes in the game, and that it would be a genius Marketing Tactic. Also the only way to know it, would be to test it out very thoroughly, that only 1 person can't handle in a limited time.

Also it is not something to take lightly, if you only knew how much money was spent by Candy Crush to analyze and code stuff you would be blown away. (From analyzing people who are more likely to spend money on the game to changing chances in the game)

"Tharivol;948643" wrote:

"Nikoms565;948628" wrote:

"Tharivol;948566" wrote:

"Nikoms565;948522" wrote:

"Exletion;948301" wrote:

"HorishBathens;948285" wrote:

"Nikoms565;947694" wrote:
OP - Google "Occam's Razor"

Occam's razor doesn't apply here

It can apply,

"If you have two theories that both explain the observed facts, then you should use the simplest until more evidence comes along"
"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations."
"If you have two equally likely solutions to a problem, choose the simplest."
"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."

The simplest explanation is that the drops are random according to the most common form, a Gaussian distribution, and people don't like it when they get bad drops.

This. What's the simpler of the two :
1) Randomness (occasionally subject to bad runs)

2) A dynamic drop rate which analyzes your roster, gear and character shard needs, spending habits, previously farmed and/or purchased gear, gear salvages or character shards, which then lowers probability as you get closer to whatever "goal" the algorithm has decided you are shooting for.

Occam's Razor suggests that option 1 is more likely. By virtue of the fact that 2 is much more complex, in fact, Occam's Razor would suggest that option 1 is almost a certainty over 2.

1. While Occam's Razor apply here, it doesn't mean that you can't investigate other choices further, and this topic evolved into it already. (After OP suggested that there is no way to know)
2. We are not talking about a system that "tracks" and "analyzes" our habbits, characters, gears, farms.. We are simply talking about if there can be a code to lower drop chances when a Gear is about to be completed, or a Character is about to level it's star.
- MK2 Zaltin Bacta gel requires 20, so when you are at 18-19 the drop chance automatically can reduce,
- Mk 3 Czerka Stun Cuffs require 50 parts, so when you are at let's say 45+, the drop chance reduce,
- Every character needs 10-15-25-30-65-85-100 shards to level a star, so when you are close to those numbers, the drop chance again can reduce,
that is based on the theory, which is infinitely simpler than what you are trying to suggest (game analyzing our habbits etc etc.) and infinitely easier to code as well.
(5% close to completion of a piece, drop chance becomes x%)

Countless people came up with the exact theory, in different times, in different places, (and to be honest it is not about just this game either) and there can be only 2 options to:
1. Drop rates are always same, but when people get bad RNG close to finishing an item/a character they realize it even more, which translates to "Selective Perception"
2. There really can be some sort of mechanic to cause this, which is not very hard to make either (certainly not harder than sorting drop chances for white/gold/purple items), and a quite legit marketing strategy.
Hence you are "much more likely" to spend crystal to refresh your energy if you have 49/50 Stun Cuffs and especially if that's the single last piece of gear to get your Maul to G11 for example, or you are at 98/100 shards on an important character and you can't get any drops, again you are much more likely to spend crystals to refresh energy to get that last pieces, than if you were on 1/100 shards. (Same with Shoretrooper or Baze from Shipments as well)

As in those lines, both are a probability. But option 2 is an assumption therefore Occam's Razor apply here. But it doesn't mean that we can't discuss it, or can't share our experiences, or even make some sort of test here by using everyone's data. (Almost all game-based calculations on Reddit are made through Data provided by the commentors)

And virtually all data that has ever been tracked suggests that drop rates are constant and consistent.

And that's your assumption. You have no solid data or any info whatsoever about it. Since no one has ever tested this exact theory. Yes they tested drop chances generally and on average came up with a close number, but this is entirely different.

Ah, no. It's not an assumption. Numbers have been compiled, results have been logged. There is no evil control algorithm.

@EventineElessedil I would write a looong essay to you as well, but someone that doesn't even read the whole topic and messages inside it, and comes to a decision by 2 lines alone doesn't actually deserve it, besides game refreshed and I got a raid to finish :)
Read everything first than comment please, so we can discuss.

"Tharivol;948695" wrote:
@EventineElessedil I would write a looong essay to you as well, but someone that doesn't even read the whole topic and messages inside it, and comes to a decision by 2 lines alone doesn't actually deserve it, besides game refreshed and I got a raid to finish :)
Read everything first than comment please, so we can discuss.

Oh dear, am I beneath your contempt? Sorry. Did not intend to offend. But like I said, it is impossible to change the mind of the conspiracy theorist.
http://i.imgur.com/Yglq0zT.gif

"EventineElessedil;948705" wrote:

"Tharivol;948695" wrote:
@EventineElessedil I would write a looong essay to you as well, but someone that doesn't even read the whole topic and messages inside it, and comes to a decision by 2 lines alone doesn't actually deserve it, besides game refreshed and I got a raid to finish :)
Read everything first than comment please, so we can discuss.

Oh dear, am I beneath your contempt? Sorry. Did not intend to offend. But like I said, it is impossible to change the mind of the conspiracy theorist.

"Tharivol;948667" wrote:
As I said, I am not suggesting that there "is" some code like that mate. I am suggesting that there can very well be such codes in the game, and that it would be a genius Marketing Tactic

To your question, "yes, you are". Since you don't even read before writing.

"Tharivol;948715" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;948705" wrote:

"Tharivol;948695" wrote:
@EventineElessedil I would write a looong essay to you as well, but someone that doesn't even read the whole topic and messages inside it, and comes to a decision by 2 lines alone doesn't actually deserve it, besides game refreshed and I got a raid to finish :)
Read everything first than comment please, so we can discuss.

Oh dear, am I beneath your contempt? Sorry. Did not intend to offend. But like I said, it is impossible to change the mind of the conspiracy theorist.

"Tharivol;948667" wrote:
As I said, I am not suggesting that there "is" some code like that mate. I am suggesting that there can very well be such codes in the game, and that it would be a genius Marketing Tactic

To your question, "yes, you are". Since you don't even read before writing.

This makes me sad.
http://i.imgur.com/wrprf3p.gif

@EventineElessedil Yeah arrogant people that lacks the ability to read makes me sad too. But don't worry you can change it :)
Move along mate, so the discussion can continue.

"J0K3R;947670" wrote:

hahahahahaha this is great

"Unimatrix010;948684" wrote:

"Nikoms565;948628" wrote:

"Tharivol;948566" wrote:

"Nikoms565;948522" wrote:

"Exletion;948301" wrote:

"HorishBathens;948285" wrote:

"Nikoms565;947694" wrote:
OP - Google "Occam's Razor"

Occam's razor doesn't apply here

It can apply,

"If you have two theories that both explain the observed facts, then you should use the simplest until more evidence comes along"
"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations."
"If you have two equally likely solutions to a problem, choose the simplest."
"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."

The simplest explanation is that the drops are random according to the most common form, a Gaussian distribution, and people don't like it when they get bad drops.

This. What's the simpler of the two :
1) Randomness (occasionally subject to bad runs)

2) A dynamic drop rate which analyzes your roster, gear and character shard needs, spending habits, previously farmed and/or purchased gear, gear salvages or character shards, which then lowers probability as you get closer to whatever "goal" the algorithm has decided you are shooting for.

Occam's Razor suggests that option 1 is more likely. By virtue of the fact that 2 is much more complex, in fact, Occam's Razor would suggest that option 1 is almost a certainty over 2.

1. While Occam's Razor apply here, it doesn't mean that you can't investigate other choices further, and this topic evolved into it already. (After OP suggested that there is no way to know)
2. We are not talking about a system that "tracks" and "analyzes" our habbits, characters, gears, farms.. We are simply talking about if there can be a code to lower drop chances when a Gear is about to be completed, or a Character is about to level it's star.
- MK2 Zaltin Bacta gel requires 20, so when you are at 18-19 the drop chance automatically can reduce,
- Mk 3 Czerka Stun Cuffs require 50 parts, so when you are at let's say 45+, the drop chance reduce,
- Every character needs 10-15-25-30-65-85-100 shards to level a star, so when you are close to those numbers, the drop chance again can reduce,
that is based on the theory, which is infinitely simpler than what you are trying to suggest (game analyzing our habbits etc etc.) and infinitely easier to code as well.
(5% close to completion of a piece, drop chance becomes x%)

Countless people came up with the exact theory, in different times, in different places, (and to be honest it is not about just this game either) and there can be only 2 options to:
1. Drop rates are always same, but when people get bad RNG close to finishing an item/a character they realize it even more, which translates to "Selective Perception"
2. There really can be some sort of mechanic to cause this, which is not very hard to make either (certainly not harder than sorting drop chances for white/gold/purple items), and a quite legit marketing strategy.
Hence you are "much more likely" to spend crystal to refresh your energy if you have 49/50 Stun Cuffs and especially if that's the single last piece of gear to get your Maul to G11 for example, or you are at 98/100 shards on an important character and you can't get any drops, again you are much more likely to spend crystals to refresh energy to get that last pieces, than if you were on 1/100 shards. (Same with Shoretrooper or Baze from Shipments as well)

As in those lines, both are a probability. But option 2 is an assumption therefore Occam's Razor apply here. But it doesn't mean that we can't discuss it, or can't share our experiences, or even make some sort of test here by using everyone's data. (Almost all game-based calculations on Reddit are made through Data provided by the commentors)

You can, of course, discuss it. And virtually all data that has ever been tracked suggests that drop rates are constant and consistent. The only time it becomes an "issue" is when a few people with no actual data agree with each other's anecdotal "evidence" and post it on the forums.

But sure, if people would rather trust and discuss their feelings regardless of actual data, have at it.

Isn't that why we still have religion in the 21st century. But let's better not go there I guess.

Actually, that's not the same. Many religions are not based on "feelings" and many scientific minded people are deeply religious - and without any intellectual dissonance. But yes, let's not go there. ;)