Refining

flotsam

I would like to be able to set MIN as my default when refining.

tmbrinks

Isn't it already?

Everytime I go to a station it is defaulted to "1"

Only upon repeated operations (at the same time) does it stay at the number you set it to.

redgreensunset

tmbrinks wrote: »

Isn't it already?

Everytime I go to a station it is defaulted to "1"

Only upon repeated operations (at the same time) does it stay at the number you set it to.

No that's crafting. Refining is set to default max.

Karmen

I think the game isnt well coded. I mean, when we have to refine mats, the calculation is done only 1 time for our %chances of having resins etc. But when you did X times the thing like it was before, we had more calculations to get the %chances.
I dont know if you see what I mean... (my english sucks)

Exemple :
right now:
- 10 mats => refining => calculation %chances (RNG) => result (negative)

Before :
- 10 mats =
- refining 1 => calculation => result
- refining 2 => calculation => result
- refining 3 => calculation => result
- refining 4 => calculation => result
- refining 5 => calculation => result
- refining 6 => calculation => result
- refining 7 => calculation => result
- refining 8 => calculation => result
- refining 9 => calculation => result
- refining 10 => calculation => result

So, before, we had more chances to get a better result than now just because we had more calculations.

another exemple:
1x 1% = 1%(maybe result=YES)= 1 resin
10x 1% = 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1%(maybe result=YES) = 3resin
etc.
you see?

That's why yes, we should be able to set Min when refining, just because the game isnt well coded...

The other way to fix that is to put more calculations when refining but, we can't know if the game is doing that or not. I assume it isnt since i get less positive results (and i'm not alone) since max refining has been introduced in game.............

votan73

Maybe this is something for you:
https://www.esoui.com/downloads/info2445-VotansImprovedMulticraft.html

tmbrinks

Karmen wrote: »

I think the game isnt well coded. I mean, when we have to refine mats, the calculation is done only 1 time for our %chances of having resins etc. But when you did X times the thing like it was before, we had more calculations to get the %chances.
I dont know if you see what I mean... (my english sucks)

Exemple :
right now:
- 10 mats => refining => calculation %chances (RNG) => result (negative)

Before :
- 10 mats =
- refining 1 => calculation => result
- refining 2 => calculation => result
- refining 3 => calculation => result
- refining 4 => calculation => result
- refining 5 => calculation => result
- refining 6 => calculation => result
- refining 7 => calculation => result
- refining 8 => calculation => result
- refining 9 => calculation => result
- refining 10 => calculation => result

So, before, we had more chances to get a better result than now just because we had more calculations.

another exemple:
1x 1% = 1%(maybe result=YES)= 1 resin
10x 1% = 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1%(maybe result=YES) = 3resin
etc.
you see?

That's why yes, we should be able to set Min when refining, just because the game isnt well coded...

The other way to fix that is to put more calculations when refining but, we can't know if the game is doing that or not. I assume it isnt since i get less positive results (and i'm not alone) since max refining has been introduced in game.............

I've been keeping data for refining both pre-multicraft, and post-multicraft, as well as testing on the PTS. I've shared it here in the crafting forums. They are the same. No change.

That conspiracy theory has been soundly and thoroughly debunked, as not a SINGLE person who has promoted it has provided a single shred of credible evidence to prove their claim.

Please, please, stop perpetuating this falsehood.

EDIT: To add link.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yQDUjYNQVsIFl0ktkbkSlfYPkzP6pgCOTMQ-qCuzfaI

Here is my data. Open and shared. Free for all to look at and comb it over looking for these "patterns" of lower refining.

If you want to change my mind (and the minds of a lot of others) you would have to share hard, concrete evidence showing else wise, not just anecdotal evidence.

tmbrinks

redgreensunset wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Isn't it already?

Everytime I go to a station it is defaulted to "1"

Only upon repeated operations (at the same time) does it stay at the number you set it to.

No that's crafting. Refining is set to default max.

My bad... why anybody would want to refine less than max (outside of somebody who has the raw all stored in the craft bag, but no longer subscribes) is beyond me.

redlink1979

It's not fixed yet...

If the default option is set to max (as it happens) then the opposite option must be available in the bottom of the screen (set amount to minimum).
The way it is atm it doesn't make any sense at all. (default is set to max and on bottom screen we have the option to set up to... the max...)



Someone clearly made a mess...

Karmen

tmbrinks wrote: »

Karmen wrote: »

I think the game isnt well coded. I mean, when we have to refine mats, the calculation is done only 1 time for our %chances of having resins etc. But when you did X times the thing like it was before, we had more calculations to get the %chances.
I dont know if you see what I mean... (my english sucks)

Exemple :
right now:
- 10 mats => refining => calculation %chances (RNG) => result (negative)

Before :
- 10 mats =
- refining 1 => calculation => result
- refining 2 => calculation => result
- refining 3 => calculation => result
- refining 4 => calculation => result
- refining 5 => calculation => result
- refining 6 => calculation => result
- refining 7 => calculation => result
- refining 8 => calculation => result
- refining 9 => calculation => result
- refining 10 => calculation => result

So, before, we had more chances to get a better result than now just because we had more calculations.

another exemple:
1x 1% = 1%(maybe result=YES)= 1 resin
10x 1% = 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1%(maybe result=YES) = 3resin
etc.
you see?

That's why yes, we should be able to set Min when refining, just because the game isnt well coded...

The other way to fix that is to put more calculations when refining but, we can't know if the game is doing that or not. I assume it isnt since i get less positive results (and i'm not alone) since max refining has been introduced in game.............

I've been keeping data for refining both pre-multicraft, and post-multicraft, as well as testing on the PTS. I've shared it here in the crafting forums. They are the same. No change.

That conspiracy theory has been soundly and thoroughly debunked, as not a SINGLE person who has promoted it has provided a single shred of credible evidence to prove their claim.

Please, please, stop perpetuating this falsehood.

EDIT: To add link.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yQDUjYNQVsIFl0ktkbkSlfYPkzP6pgCOTMQ-qCuzfaI

Here is my data. Open and shared. Free for all to look at and comb it over looking for these "patterns" of lower refining.

If you want to change my mind (and the minds of a lot of others) you would have to share hard, concrete evidence showing else wise, not just anecdotal evidence.

Your document doesnt say anything about comparison between before and now.

tmbrinks

Karmen wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Karmen wrote: »

I think the game isnt well coded. I mean, when we have to refine mats, the calculation is done only 1 time for our %chances of having resins etc. But when you did X times the thing like it was before, we had more calculations to get the %chances.
I dont know if you see what I mean... (my english sucks)

Exemple :
right now:
- 10 mats => refining => calculation %chances (RNG) => result (negative)

Before :
- 10 mats =
- refining 1 => calculation => result
- refining 2 => calculation => result
- refining 3 => calculation => result
- refining 4 => calculation => result
- refining 5 => calculation => result
- refining 6 => calculation => result
- refining 7 => calculation => result
- refining 8 => calculation => result
- refining 9 => calculation => result
- refining 10 => calculation => result

So, before, we had more chances to get a better result than now just because we had more calculations.

another exemple:
1x 1% = 1%(maybe result=YES)= 1 resin
10x 1% = 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1% + 1%(maybe result=YES) + 1%(maybe result=YES) = 3resin
etc.
you see?

That's why yes, we should be able to set Min when refining, just because the game isnt well coded...

The other way to fix that is to put more calculations when refining but, we can't know if the game is doing that or not. I assume it isnt since i get less positive results (and i'm not alone) since max refining has been introduced in game.............

I've been keeping data for refining both pre-multicraft, and post-multicraft, as well as testing on the PTS. I've shared it here in the crafting forums. They are the same. No change.

That conspiracy theory has been soundly and thoroughly debunked, as not a SINGLE person who has promoted it has provided a single shred of credible evidence to prove their claim.

Please, please, stop perpetuating this falsehood.

EDIT: To add link.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yQDUjYNQVsIFl0ktkbkSlfYPkzP6pgCOTMQ-qCuzfaI

Here is my data. Open and shared. Free for all to look at and comb it over looking for these "patterns" of lower refining.

If you want to change my mind (and the minds of a lot of others) you would have to share hard, concrete evidence showing else wise, not just anecdotal evidence.

Your document doesnt say anything about comparison between before and now.

Compare the rates for the individual refines before 8/12/19 and the ones before. No change.

The graphs that I have would show a steady decline if there was a change. They don't

The "value" on each individual page for blacksmithing, woodworking, jewelry, and clothing, would show a decline since those are determined using average of the return.

Just because I haven't EXPLICITLY shown and calculated it, doesn't mean the data isn't there.

tmbrinks

To sate all the naysayers. I have now added tabs to my (long-running) spreadsheet showing the difference from "pre-multicraft" to "post-multicraft" for each of the 4 refinings.

In summary
Blacksmithing - Before - After
Honing Stone - 1.54% - 1.52%
Dwarven Oil - 1.27% - 1.22%
Grain Solvent - 0.74% - 0.69%
Tempering Alloy - 0.48% - 0.44%

Jewelry - Before - After
Terne Grains - 1.48% - 1.55%
Iridium Grains - 1.33% - 1.25%
Zircon Grains - 0.72% - 0.72%
Chromium Grains - 0.48% - 0.48%

Clothing (Light) - Before - After
Hemming - 1.47% - 1.61%
Embroidery - 1.25% - 1.12%
Elegant Lining - 0.76% - 0.73%
Dreugh Wax - 0.51% - 0.50%

Clothing (Medium) - Before - After
Hemming - 1.48% - 1.40%
Embroidery - 1.24% - 1.32%
Elegant Lining - 0.70% - 0.77%
Dreugh Wax - 0.46% - 0.53%

Woodworking - Before - After
Pitch - 1.54% - 1.52%
Turpen - 1.28% - 1.24%
Mastic - 0.72% - 0.75%
Rosin - 0.50% - 0.46%

Some higher, some lower, all very close to the same number.

Any questions.

If you want to dispute, show your own data.

kringled_1

With all due respect, tmbrinks, if Karmen is trying to make the point I think he is, your very large data sets don't really reflect his concern. I think a part of the issue he's trying to get at is that a lot of people, including myself, think that eso has very streaky rng. In the long run, as seen in your collected data, results are in line with expectations. In smaller runs, in this case refining, what I would call streaky means that results would include returns above the mean and below the mean more often than 'should' happen.

tmbrinks

kringled_1 wrote: »

With all due respect, tmbrinks, if Karmen is trying to make the point I think he is, your very large data sets don't really reflect his concern. I think a part of the issue he's trying to get at is that a lot of people, including myself, think that eso has very streaky rng. In the long run, as seen in your collected data, results are in line with expectations. In smaller runs, in this case refining, what I would call streaky means that results would include returns above the mean and below the mean more often than 'should' happen.

I just did the comparison from before to after which is exactly what they were asking for.

Also, the individual tabs show it for each separate refine that I've done. Also calculated the likelihood of getting that given a random normal distribution. It was fairly random before, it's still random after. The data tables I have show exactly what your concern is as well.

OG_Kaveman

kringled_1 wrote: »

With all due respect, tmbrinks, if Karmen is trying to make the point I think he is, your very large data sets don't really reflect his concern. I think a part of the issue he's trying to get at is that a lot of people, including myself, think that eso has very streaky rng. In the long run, as seen in your collected data, results are in line with expectations. In smaller runs, in this case refining, what I would call streaky means that results would include returns above the mean and below the mean more often than 'should' happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_hand

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias

flotsam

votan73 wrote: »

Maybe this is something for you:
https://www.esoui.com/downloads/info2445-VotansImprovedMulticraft.html

Awesome. I'll give it a go. Thank you.

idk

tmbrinks wrote: »

kringled_1 wrote: »

With all due respect, tmbrinks, if Karmen is trying to make the point I think he is, your very large data sets don't really reflect his concern. I think a part of the issue he's trying to get at is that a lot of people, including myself, think that eso has very streaky rng. In the long run, as seen in your collected data, results are in line with expectations. In smaller runs, in this case refining, what I would call streaky means that results would include returns above the mean and below the mean more often than 'should' happen.

I just did the comparison from before to after which is exactly what they were asking for.

Also, the individual tabs show it for each separate refine that I've done. Also calculated the likelihood of getting that given a random normal distribution. It was fairly random before, it's still random after. The data tables I have show exactly what your concern is as well.

Good and valid information.

When small batches are refined data can be skewed as there are not enough data points. Over time, and most noticeable with large batches, refining results have always been consistent and even the person you quoted admitted that.

kringled_1

I can't actually look at the sheet right now because mobile, but I'll

tmbrinks wrote: »

kringled_1 wrote: »

With all due respect, tmbrinks, if Karmen is trying to make the point I think he is, your very large data sets don't really reflect his concern. I think a part of the issue he's trying to get at is that a lot of people, including myself, think that eso has very streaky rng. In the long run, as seen in your collected data, results are in line with expectations. In smaller runs, in this case refining, what I would call streaky means that results would include returns above the mean and below the mean more often than 'should' happen.

I just did the comparison from before to after which is exactly what they were asking for.

Also, the individual tabs show it for each separate refine that I've done. Also calculated the likelihood of getting that given a random normal distribution. It was fairly random before, it's still random after. The data tables I have show exactly what your concern is as well.

Your data actually looks a bit odd to my eye.
I looked at all crafts post multicrafting, I didn't look at pre at all.
For woodworking and jewelry, nothing jumps out.
For blacksmithing and clothing, looking at purple and gold results, results that fall into the bottom 5% of the binomial expectations or the top 5% happen a lot more often than the 10% one would expect. Probability and statistics are not my strongest area, so I don't know how to properly calculate the odds of seeing results like this.

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_hand

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias

As far as the clustering illusion goes: when looked at correctly, most of the pRNGs that I know of will cluster. It has little practical impact in say most gaming situations, but it's why you have to use these things carefully if you're trying to do something like a Monte Carlo simulation within a multi-parameter space, because unlike the random events used in probability theory, a seed dependent pRNG does actually have the results of one event specifically depend on the prior event.

People in other loot RNG games that I've been on have thrown a lot of theories; most of those I've never seen anything outside of what I take as normal RNG. In this game, people have a lot of conspiracy theories that I see about how the game is tracking them and trying to manipulate their luck. All I'm arguing is that this game throws clusters of the same/similar results more often than I'm used to, both in favor of/against the player when it comes to refining. (And weird clusters of replicate items, down to the trait sometimes). Is it possible that it's doing something unusual when it comes to RNG seeds that gives me this feeling? Yes. Is it possible that I'm just imagining it? Also yes, but the complaints in this game are a bit different than I see in others.

Taleof2Cities

kringled_1 wrote: »

Your data actually looks a bit odd to my eye.

Of all the discussions we’ve had about @tmbrinks raw mats refinement drops, I’ve never seen anyone say the data set looks “a bit odd to my eye”.

Let’s hope @tmbrinks doesn’t get too offended.

kringled_1 wrote: »

Is it possible that I'm just imagining it?

Unless you can share your in-game data that supports your theories, yes, you’re probably imagining it ...

tmbrinks

@kringled_1 Yes, I have had some back "luck" with some drops (particularly Blacksmithing), and the odds of it happening due to random chance (assuming it's a random normal distribution) are pretty small at this point and I'm still not convinced that the drop rate is something other than what has been hypothesized. Even with the large sample I have it's still not statistically significant at the 99% confidence level.

Alinhbo_Tyaka

tmbrinks wrote: »

redgreensunset wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Isn't it already?

Everytime I go to a station it is defaulted to "1"

Only upon repeated operations (at the same time) does it stay at the number you set it to.

No that's crafting. Refining is set to default max.

My bad... why anybody would want to refine less than max (outside of somebody who has the raw all stored in the craft bag, but no longer subscribes) is beyond me.

I don't always want to refine everything I have because I like to keep some around to sell when I need extra gold. It is for this reason I would rather have the default set to 1 and improve the UI to allow me to specify the number of items to refine.

redlink1979

redlink1979 wrote: »

It's not fixed yet...

If the default option is set to max (as it happens) then the opposite option must be available in the bottom of the screen (set amount to minimum).
The way it is atm it doesn't make any sense at all. (default is set to max and on bottom screen we have the option to set up to... the max...)

Someone clearly made a mess...

Fixed!

On bottom screen there's the option to set the amount to be refined to the minimum! Hooray!