Random Number Generator improvement suggestion.

Soleya

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

jkemmery

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

@Slayer9292_ESO Your sample of 2 players is WAY too small to infer there is a problem.

Soleya

jkemmery wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

@Slayer9292_ESO Your sample of 2 players is WAY too small to infer there is a problem.

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

Thymos

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

@Slayer9292_ESO Your sample of 2 players is WAY too small to infer there is a problem.

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

In order to do a reliable sample of the population of eso players, you'll need to poll thousands.

Soleya

Thymos wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

@Slayer9292_ESO Your sample of 2 players is WAY too small to infer there is a problem.

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

In order to do a reliable sample of the population of eso players, you'll need to poll thousands.

Still don't understand why that matters. If I polled 1 million players, I'm guaranteed one has never recieved a fragment (myself) and 1 and received many (my wife). So it could be 1 person gets nothing and 999,999 get stuff, or 1 gets everything and 999,999 get nothing or any value in between. Still could use an improvement.

How many fragments have you gotten and how many writs have you done?

Thymos

So if one person is left behind, it needs improvement?

I don't agree.

BlueGreenMikey

It could just be a coincidence, and it could be a poorly implemented RNG. We don't really know based on two people.

But,

Thymos wrote: »

In order to do a reliable sample of the population of eso players, you'll need to poll thousands.

You could get a tiny margin of error of about 3% with about 1,100. The margin of error only goes up to about 5% at 400 people.

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue.

Eh, it depends on if you care about randomness or not. In a purely random system, this will happen to someone, regardless of even scaling up drop rates.

Thymos

BlueGreenMikey wrote: »

It could just be a coincidence, and it could be a poorly implemented RNG. We don't really know based on two people.

But,

Thymos wrote: »

In order to do a reliable sample of the population of eso players, you'll need to poll thousands.

You could get a tiny margin of error of about 3% with about 1,100. The margin of error only goes up to about 5% at 400 people.

At what confidence level?

Also, what are you assuming the population size of ESO players truly is? You'd have to have the numbers of both consoles and PC/Mac.

I may have exaggerated a bit, but you'd definitely need more than 2.

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

OmniDevil

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

TL:DR - My wife has them, but I don't. I need to have them, therefore I should receive them as I'm entitled to them.

I don't agree. RNG is RNG. It's random for a reason. Even if the drop rate % was increased, the flipside of this coin is that "it's now too common and not worth anything anymore. Please decrease the drop rate.". Time Played =/= entitled to items/loot.

jkemmery

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

@Slayer9292_ESO Your sample of 2 players is WAY too small to infer there is a problem.

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

@Slayer9292_ESO

When you put it that way, I agree. If a single player has gone a long time without receiving a particular level of a particular type of item, then their chances of getting said item increase, I'd buy in to that as a legitimate solution.

whyB

No child left behind? Every person gets a trophy for participation? I don't know. Keep random at random.

jkemmery

OmniDevil wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

TL:DR - My wife has them, but I don't. I need to have them, therefore I should receive them as I'm entitled to them.

I don't agree. RNG is RNG. It's random for a reason. Even if the drop rate % was increased, the flipside of this coin is that "it's now too common and not worth anything anymore. Please decrease the drop rate.". Time Played =/= entitled to items/loot.

@OmniDevil

Again someone equates someone wanting fairness to some sort of negative "entitlement" connotation. Why would you say that? What's wrong with the suggestion that the acquisition of random items be made more fair across the board? Why is asking for fairness equated to "entitlement"? I find this mindset ridiculous.

Psychobunni

I've seen this mentioned before in regards to those monster sets.


Being that 99.9% of the time my RNG sucks, so much so vet dungeons are not worth the investment for me to do anymore (I own no sets from them)...I agree with this 100%

Are you pc? Send feedback in game too!

danovic

Been doing it 3 times a day since release and my problem is not getting them but getting the same ones over and over again I have 5 number 7s and 4 number 4s and no others that's just stupid. It makes no sense at all to get the same page of a rare item over and over again it supposed to be a rare book why would there be so many of the same page. There random generator table sucks.

Thymos

jkemmery wrote: »

OmniDevil wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

TL:DR - My wife has them, but I don't. I need to have them, therefore I should receive them as I'm entitled to them.

I don't agree. RNG is RNG. It's random for a reason. Even if the drop rate % was increased, the flipside of this coin is that "it's now too common and not worth anything anymore. Please decrease the drop rate.". Time Played =/= entitled to items/loot.

@OmniDevil

Again someone equates someone wanting fairness to some sort of negative "entitlement" connotation. Why would you say that? What's wrong with the suggestion that the acquisition of random items be made more fair across the board? Why is asking for fairness equated to "entitlement"? I find this mindset ridiculous.

However, there is nothing unfair about RNG. RNG has it so we all start on a level playing field, and nothing really improves our chances. That is how the system is right now, and there is nothing unfair about it.

OmniDevil

jkemmery wrote: »

@OmniDevil

Again someone equates someone wanting fairness to some sort of negative "entitlement" connotation. Why would you say that? What's wrong with the suggestion that the acquisition of random items be made more fair across the board? Why is asking for fairness equated to "entitlement"? I find this mindset ridiculous.

@jkemmery

It's not a mindset. I'm simply pointing out the tone the OP worded his post in. He wants something someone else has and hasn't been lucky enough to obtain it, therefore he feels the game should be adjusted in a way that benefits him and others like him so he has a better chance at getting the item.

Assuming this isn't your first MMO, you shouldn't be surprised to see someone asking for "fairness" in dropped loot. I'm definitely not disagreeing that drop rates are utter trash in some, if not most, cases. This is especially true if you tend to be on the "brown" end of the stick, however. Never should ones bottom of the barrel "luck" mean something should be changed to better benefit their gain. RNG and Grinding go hand in hand. If you want something, in an MMORPG that is governed by RNG, you must grind for that item(s). You're wanting a better chance at rolling that virtual 7 and on that virtual table. You don't ask the Pit Boss to give you a set of dice that have more 7s on them to increase your odds.

If you start increasing odds of rare items being dropped from various methods/nodes, the value of said items become null as they become more and more common place

However, another suggestion (in my opinion, safer than what the OP suggested) is to remove various items from the lockboxes for completeing the writs. The less items you are able to obtain from them, you have a better chance at getting the other items you really want. Over Anudantly Large Shared Loot Tables are one of the top reasons RNG is such an ugly.....thing.

VoidBlue

i suggest you treat your wife to a lovely night out and shower her with much affection and maybe she will share some of those mats with you

Akavir_Sentinel

Random is random, whether it appears to be or not. Take Apple, for example. Their shuffle function for music is random, and people were complaining that sometimes it would play a song from the same artist or the very next song on the list. So, Apple changed the way shuffle works and made it less random to make it appear more random.

jkemmery

OmniDevil wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

@OmniDevil

Again someone equates someone wanting fairness to some sort of negative "entitlement" connotation. Why would you say that? What's wrong with the suggestion that the acquisition of random items be made more fair across the board? Why is asking for fairness equated to "entitlement"? I find this mindset ridiculous.

@jkemmery

It's not a mindset. I'm simply pointing out the tone the OP worded his post in. He wants something someone else has and hasn't been lucky enough to obtain it, therefore he feels the game should be adjusted in a way that benefits him and others like him so he has a better chance at getting the item.

Assuming this isn't your first MMO, you shouldn't be surprised to see someone asking for "fairness" in dropped loot. I'm definitely not disagreeing that drop rates are utter trash in some, if not most, cases. This is especially true if you tend to be on the "brown" end of the stick, however. Never should ones bottom of the barrel "luck" mean something should be changed to better benefit their gain. RNG and Grinding go hand in hand. If you want something, in an MMORPG that is governed by RNG, you must grind for that item(s). You're wanting a better chance at rolling that virtual 7 and on that virtual table. You don't ask the Pit Boss to give you a set of dice that have more 7s on them to increase your odds.

If you start increasing odds of rare items being dropped from various methods/nodes, the value of said items become null as they become more and more common place

However, another suggestion (in my opinion, safer than what the OP suggested) is to remove various items from the lockboxes for completeing the writs. The less items you are able to obtain from them, you have a better chance at getting the other items you really want. Over Anudantly Large Shared Loot Tables are one of the top reasons RNG is such an ugly.....thing.

The OP's suggestion here ...

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

I wanted to make a suggestion on what I thought would improve the random number generator. For this I want to use the example of Psijic Ambrosia recipe fragments.

I've done the provisioning writs twice per day (2 characters) since the release of the Psijic Ambrosia. I've found 0 fragments. My wife on the other hand has done it with 8 characters almost every day, and found 10 fragments. Granted, she'd done nearly 4 times as many as me, but I still have yet to find a single fragment and she's found 10. If the RNG was balanced, I should have found 2.5 fragments in the same time.

My suggestion is to increase your chance of finding a fragment for each writ you do on a character. So say first time I do a write I have a 1% chance to find it, next time I have a 2% chance, then 3, then 4 etc. Eventually I'll be guaranteed to find one. Once the person gets the fragment, reset the chance back to the beginning and start over.

I would suggest the same for other similar RNG's. Like finding an imperial motif. My wife has played more than I have (she has more time), and she has found 3 imperial motifs, I have found 0. It's not a looting issue either, as I have reached 600,000g in sales for the Black Market Mogul achievement, my wife is at less than 100k. I didn't find my first purple motif until after playing the game for 10 months. Chance to find rare items should increase longer you play until you find one.

Same could go for the dungeon boss helm drops. I've known people who've done the dungeon dozens if not 100's of times and never got a helm, and another player will get a helm the first time.

@Slayer9292_ESO Your sample of 2 players is WAY too small to infer there is a problem.

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

... to me seems like a valid way to address the issue of players getting the "brown end of the stick" as you put it. In no way is it suggesting "entitlement", which is what you implied in your post.

To the broader question, it seems anyone attempts to address the issue of fairness, someone always invokes the "entitlement" argument. This is something that I really don't understand. How does someone wanting to make things more fair across the board equate to them seeking "entitlement"?

Thymos

It's not fair that someone gets an increased chance of getting something rare, regardless of the fact that I may have gotten something rare already.

Soleya

VoidBlue wrote: »

i suggest you treat your wife to a lovely night out and shower her with much affection and maybe she will share some of those mats with you

Actually she'll make the psijic ambrosia for me, so it's not about wanting the recipe, it's about the fact that none have dropped even after over 70 tries of getting one. This was just my example of how to make the game more fun. I could also just go buy the entire recipe, but I like when I end up getting something after a bunch of hard work.

@Akavir_Sentinel For your music example, I can explain it in programming terms. If you have say 10 songs, and you do random by getting a random integer from 1-10 to play the next song you could end up with same song playing again randomly. To fix that you make a list of numbers 1-10 and randomize the order then play though the list. You'll never repeat songs that way. It's still random, just a much better way of doing it.

BlueGreenMikey

For what it's worth, the OP's experience could mean that the RNG is actually not working properly. It doesn't necessarily mean that, but a highly improbable scenario (and it's not isolated) could mean that the RNG is not actually random.

MCMancub

It seems like OP is unhappy with the harsh, but ultimately fair, reality of randomness, so he's calling for a system which isn't random, but only appears to be (your chances increase each time you try until you are guaranteed to obtain the fragment).

This is an unfair system by definition since it means some players will get the fragment by chance, and others will have it given to them simply because they have tried a certain number of times.

If you want a fair system in which everyone can be guaranteed these fragments (I don't, but OP seems to), then you would need to move access to something that all players have to do a fixed number of times (get a fragment every 30 writs or so).

jkemmery

BlueGreenMikey wrote: »

For what it's worth, the OP's experience could mean that the RNG is actually not working properly. It doesn't necessarily mean that, but a highly improbable scenario (and it's not isolated) could mean that the RNG is not actually random.

The thing is, no "random number generators" are ever actually random.

Soleya

Thymos wrote: »

It's not fair that someone gets an increased chance of getting something rare, regardless of the fact that I may have gotten something rare already.

Except that the longer you go without getting one, the higher your chance of getting something rare. It does work for everyone.

MCMancub wrote: »

It seems like OP is unhappy with the harsh, but ultimately fair, reality of randomness, so he's calling for a system which isn't random, but only appears to be (your chances increase each time you try until you are guaranteed to obtain the fragment).

This is an unfair system by definition since it means some players will get the fragment by chance, and others will have it given to them simply because they have tried a certain number of times.

If you want a fair system in which everyone can be guaranteed these fragments (I don't, but OP seems to), then you would need to move access to something that all players have to do a fixed number of times (get a fragment every 30 writs or so).

With what I suggested it would take 100 days of trying to be guaranteed a fragment. Which means 700 days (2 years) to be guaranteed the recipe.

If you were lucky and got all 7 in a row, you would get to use the recipe for 2 years before a the other player.

My solution could also be modified so you are never guaranteed, but your chance just increases to some cap level.

Btw, random numbers in software are not actually random. So it is possible for them to be unfair. In software Pseudo Random Numbers are used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudorandomness

They only appear random, and use a seed to generate them. If you use the same seed you get the same numbers every time.

If a seed is based off something like say the date and time your character was created you could end up with accounts that are super lucky and ones that are never lucky.

MCMancub

jkemmery wrote: »

BlueGreenMikey wrote: »

For what it's worth, the OP's experience could mean that the RNG is actually not working properly. It doesn't necessarily mean that, but a highly improbable scenario (and it's not isolated) could mean that the RNG is not actually random.

The thing is, no "random number generators" are ever actually random.

Maybe because, mathematically speaking, nothing outside of the quantum field in our universe (arguably not even there) is truly random. Everything can be determined with numbers and processing power.

jkemmery

MCMancub wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

BlueGreenMikey wrote: »

For what it's worth, the OP's experience could mean that the RNG is actually not working properly. It doesn't necessarily mean that, but a highly improbable scenario (and it's not isolated) could mean that the RNG is not actually random.

The thing is, no "random number generators" are ever actually random.

Maybe because, mathematically speaking, nothing outside of the quantum field in our universe (arguably not even there) is truly random. Everything can be determined with numbers and processing power.

No, no random number generators are truly random within definable parameters. They are "random enough" to be practical, but never truly random due to various factors that involve the actual mechanics of integrated circuitry.

OmniDevil

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

jkemmery wrote: »

... to me seems like a valid way to address the issue of players getting the "brown end of the stick" as you put it. In no way is it suggesting "entitlement", which is what you implied in your post.

To the broader question, it seems anyone attempts to address the issue of fairness, someone always invokes the "entitlement" argument. This is something that I really don't understand. How does someone wanting to make things more fair across the board equate to them seeking "entitlement"?

Not receiving an item isn't game breaking, not does it prevent the game from being unplayable for him. So, why is the word "fair" being tossed around?

Related to his suggestion, I find it very extremely unbelievable that any one person has never received a rare item. Blue, Purple, Yellow or not. The Diablo 3 mechanic works, but doesn't follow what he was originally suggesting. He believes the longer you play (not in one time frame, not for the day, but your overall cumalitive amount), should warrant better drop rates. Why should one's year worth of playtime provide them with a better drop chance over someone who has been playing for 6 months? Maybe that's not what he meant and he meant to protray his suggestion more closely to that of the Diablo 3 RNG system. In that case, that might work, but with the way that works, you have to be actively logged in and playing for it to even kick in. So, with that said, in order for that to consistenly work, Little Johnny and Susie would need to stay home from work/school, ignore the family and friends for an extended amount of time to increase those odds. A No Lifing boost is not something players should be forced into. And, lets face it, Diablo 3 was so bloated with Legendary loot/items that it was next to impossible to never receive at least one Legendary every 30min-1hr (granted may not have been what you wanted, but it was Legendary nonetheless, which is what the system is designed to do).

I didn't envoke the entitlement argument, as you put it. I simply used a word, albeit a poor choice, to convey the tone his suggestion was written in. Though, what other word can you use for a situation where one feels the game should be adjusted to better benefit their gain. I can see this a touchy subject for you. I apologize if I offended you, as that was not my objective, however. I did imply that the OP felt he is entitled to something because, no matter how you look at it or put it, what he wants is implying an entitlement view on the real issue, which is RNG sucks and believes more so for him. Do I feel it's "fair" that someone else has obtained something more frequently than he has? No, it's not, however. Personal feelings aside, it's random, no matter how you see it. You want that item(s), keep playing and rolling the dice.

MCMancub

jkemmery wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

BlueGreenMikey wrote: »

For what it's worth, the OP's experience could mean that the RNG is actually not working properly. It doesn't necessarily mean that, but a highly improbable scenario (and it's not isolated) could mean that the RNG is not actually random.

The thing is, no "random number generators" are ever actually random.

Maybe because, mathematically speaking, nothing outside of the quantum field in our universe (arguably not even there) is truly random. Everything can be determined with numbers and processing power.

No, no random number generators are truly random within definable parameters. They are "random enough" to be practical, but never truly random due to various factors that involve the actual mechanics of integrated circuitry.

Exactly. I was being facetious. Though in this case it wouldn't be any sort of hardware doing the randomization. Whatever back-end makes up the server simply uses a built-in random number generator function made from a linear congruential generator algorithm to produce pseudo-random numbers.

jkemmery

OmniDevil wrote: »

Slayer9292_ESO wrote: »

So if I asked 100 players and 50 have gotten a lot of rare items and 50 have not, how is that different?

Or if I asked 100 players and 99 of them got rare items and 1 did not, again, how does that signify no problem? If one player never gets rare drops, there is an issue. The fix is improving their chance of getting something the longer they play.

Its not a new idea either. Diablo 3 implemented a similar feature in Loot 2.0. Increase chance of legendary drop the longer a player hasn't gotten one.

jkemmery wrote: »

... to me seems like a valid way to address the issue of players getting the "brown end of the stick" as you put it. In no way is it suggesting "entitlement", which is what you implied in your post.

To the broader question, it seems anyone attempts to address the issue of fairness, someone always invokes the "entitlement" argument. This is something that I really don't understand. How does someone wanting to make things more fair across the board equate to them seeking "entitlement"?

Not receiving an item isn't game breaking, not does it prevent the game from being unplayable for him. So, why is the word "fair" being tossed around?

Related to his suggestion, I find it very extremely unbelievable that any one person has never received a rare item. Blue, Purple, Yellow or not. The Diablo 3 mechanic works, but doesn't follow what he was originally suggesting. He believes the longer you play (not in one time frame, not for the day, but your overall cumalitive amount), should warrant better drop rates. Why should one's year worth of playtime provide them with a better drop chance over someone who has been playing for 6 months? Maybe that's not what he meant and he meant to protray his suggestion more closely to that of the Diablo 3 RNG system. In that case, that might work, but with the way that works, you have to be actively logged in and playing for it to even kick in. So, with that said, in order for that to consistenly work, Little Johnny and Susie would need to stay home from work/school, ignore the family and friends for an extended amount of time to increase those odds. A No Lifing boost is not something players should be forced into. And, lets face it, Diablo 3 was so bloated with Legendary loot/items that it was next to impossible to never receive at least one Legendary every 30min-1hr (granted may not have been what you wanted, but it was Legendary nonetheless, which is what the system is designed to do).

I didn't envoke the entitlement argument, as you put it. I simply used a word, albeit a poor choice, to convey the tone his suggestion was written in. Though, what other word can you use for a situation where one feels the game should be adjusted to better benefit their gain. I can see this a touchy subject for you. I apologize if I offended you, as that was not my objective, however. I did imply that the OP felt he is entitled to something because, no matter how you look at it or put it, what he wants is implying an entitlement view on the real issue, which is RNG sucks and believes more so for him. Do I feel it's "fair" that someone else has obtained something more frequently than he has? No, it's not, however. Personal feelings aside, it's random, no matter how you see it. You want that item(s), keep playing and rolling the dice.

You didn't offend me, but in the last couple of years or so the attitude I see of many people that if someone strives to address an issue they see as being unfair, immediately jump to accusation of "entitlement" is to me baffling. No, life is not fair, but who wouldn't want it to be made as fair as possible? Unless you're the one who benefits from the unfairness. And the way I see it, the truly entitled in our society have attempted to demonize anyone wanting fairness as entitled themselves, and have convinced many of the masses that anytime someone calls for fairness, that person must be be seeking entitlement, thus ensuring the truly entitled their continued positions of entitlement.

An attempt to make things fair should be seen as a positive, not a negative.

jkemmery

MCMancub wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

jkemmery wrote: »

BlueGreenMikey wrote: »

For what it's worth, the OP's experience could mean that the RNG is actually not working properly. It doesn't necessarily mean that, but a highly improbable scenario (and it's not isolated) could mean that the RNG is not actually random.

The thing is, no "random number generators" are ever actually random.

Maybe because, mathematically speaking, nothing outside of the quantum field in our universe (arguably not even there) is truly random. Everything can be determined with numbers and processing power.

No, no random number generators are truly random within definable parameters. They are "random enough" to be practical, but never truly random due to various factors that involve the actual mechanics of integrated circuitry.

Exactly. I was being facetious. Though in this case it wouldn't be any sort of hardware doing the randomization. Whatever back-end makes up the server simply uses a built-in random number generator function made from a linear congruential generator algorithm to produce pseudo-random numbers.

The hardware it runs on would still play a part ...