The illusion of retreat....
What's the point of saying your characters have a 70% chance of escape during raids when they clearly dont. Out of about 13 attempts, I've managed 3. So either 70% is inaccurate or I just have the worst luck ever.
Forum Discussion
"Dgreaser;613936" wrote:
Tier 7 is only 10% chance . And its called escape, retreating is something completely different.
wut?- It's 40% for t7
- Anecdotal evidence, small sample size.
Do it 1000 times, record each result, then have 9 other people do it 1000 times and record their results. Then you'll have enough data to draw a reasonable conclusion. - Don't worry. Eventually you will get to a point where your guild is overpowered for the rancor and you only get one single go anyway. No retreats are nessacary since you are not allowed to go again.
"C00L_Story;614203" wrote:
"Dgreaser;613936" wrote:
Tier 7 is only 10% chance . And its called escape, retreating is something completely different.
Look at this guy bringing in his knowledge like he knows things....good job.
HHaha haha"C00L_Story;614203" wrote:
"Dgreaser;613936" wrote:
Tier 7 is only 10% chance . And its called escape, retreating is something completely different.
Well technically what you do us retreat since you're not actually escaping. See, dgreaser, since you want to focus on semantics instead of my point...if you're attacking something and it goes bad, you retreat. If you're being held captive and get away, it's called escape.
Weird how somehow you managed to understand me. Next time, stay on topic.- it should probably be called restart then... as if you were to retreat you would take your damage with you. but you don't you start afresh... so maybe restart and retreat would be better terminology..
- we should be careful though cause they may actually "fix this" and like hey we brought you what you wanted community new update this week... rephrasing of terminology within game...
"NicWester;614413" wrote:
Anecdotal evidence, small sample size.
Do it 1000 times, record each result, then have 9 other people do it 1000 times and record their results. Then you'll have enough data to draw a reasonable conclusion.
Just a quick point about statistics: You don't need a sample size of 1000 - usually just a couple hundred is sufficient within most acceptable confidence level ranges - at least the ones typically applied in the cases of this game. My point simply being that is the ability states 40%, and we run it a few hundred times and it comes up 37%, it probably is 40%.
Now, if after a couple hundred attempts, it shows up at 22%, there is a legitimate concern. But 3 of 13 attempts is hardly a sufficient sample size to conclude anything."Darthpippa;615488" wrote:
we should be careful though cause they may actually "fix this" and like hey we brought you what you wanted community new update this week... rephrasing of terminology within game...
Haha...same system with accurate terminology. I like it.
