Which ATs have the best chance of getting VR and R in trials?
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-05-12 07:46 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
The day after the patch, my Fire/Rad troller ran 4 trials, got 2 rares and 2 VRs. Needless to say, that warped my expectations. My Fire/Fire/Fire blaster has run about 30 trials since the patch, and only gotten 1 VR.
Conversely, my blaster is MUCH luckier at purp drops. 4 or 5 over the past year, while my troller has never gotten any.
Yeah, its hard not to visualize patterns in all this. Not saying there IS one, but I definitely agree that we, as humans, are hard-wired to distill meaning and form from meaninglessness and formlessness.
Makes you wonder where else in life we think we see patterns and meanings where they don't exist.
Stay Gold, Paragon. Stay Gold.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
I heard clicking the glowies causes ambushes.
Quote:
Actually, its 0.00 through 100.00. 10,001 possible results, due to wraparound roundoff. 0.00 and 100.00 are about half as common as the other rolls.
|
Originally Posted by HelinCarnate
Actually with to hit there are 10,000 different results; 0.01 to 100.00.
just picking at nits. |
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
These days most random number generators in systems like this are either seeded with the time as a 32-bit integer, or with an entropy pool. And most random numbers don't work quite the way you describe. Most use functions over modulo arithmetic, and many are based on FSRs - feedback shift registers. A well known example is the Mersenne Twister for those remotely interested.
|
Originally Posted by Kangstor
Ok lets see about some definations first.
Random: things occur without order or apparent reason. pseudo-random: describes a sequence of numbers which has all the properties of a random sequence following some probability distribution (except true randomness), but which is actually generated using a repeatable deterministic algorithm. Computer programs uses pseudo-random to create a randomness image. Humans can't write a program that works on a total random since you can't describe it to a computer to compute. So how does it works, there are a few ways the one I know is; producing a long enough string of numbers (most of the time diving numbers equally across in the string and keep repeating them like 10 times so a string of 1-10 should have at least a string size of 100) than multiplying the next number in the string with systems clock in seconds or miliseconds and diving number to a big number to get a number between 0 and 1. Than check number with a table for example if its between 0 and 0.45 than give common, 0.45 to 0.7 uncommon 0.7 to 0.9 gives rare 0.9 to 1 gives v.rare. Taking above example people may get same type of rewards over and over because they are a little unlucky hitting at the same portion of string and system time. Considering there are more than 2000 player in CoH (don't know exact number) and assuming that each have at least 2 or 3 level 50's we will have a pool 6000 if string was not long (lets say a string of 500 would be too low for this) enough or somehow repeats similiar behaviour during its lenght (for example if string has a few numbers consecutively 0.45-0.7 results when multiplied with system time) than it may look like it has a pattern which it doesn't and it will be hard to find where is problem. I am not saying CoH's random table works like this but its most probably a similiar algorithm which results in such behaviour and people are only seeing this behaviour, this doesn't mean system working wrong or right its not easy to tell this and if its really not dependant on participation as a metric than its almost impossible to see where is the problem (for example the ones I mentioned above) unless you have hundred-thousands of data if not milions. |
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
While computers can't produce truly random numbers (at least with software alone, I believe there are hardware modules that use physical properties like temperature or light fluctuations to produce true random numbers) they can certainly produce numbers that are close enough to random for this purpose. You might get streaks in a series of rolls that happen very close together (such as multiple people's rolls from the same successful run) but you aren't going to get streaks over multiple runs due to poor random number generation. The C random function (which is what CoH supposedly uses) isn't that bad, and even if it was it wouldn't behave differently for one character than another unless it used some fixed value from the character itself as a seed (which would be a bad idea).|
Originally Posted by Kangstor
Taking above example people may get same type of rewards over and over because they are a little unlucky hitting at the same portion of string and system time. Considering there are more than 2000 player in CoH (don't know exact number) and assuming that each have at least 2 or 3 level 50's we will have a pool 6000 if string was not long (lets say a string of 500 would be too low for this) enough or somehow repeats similiar behaviour during its lenght (for example if string has a few numbers consecutively 0.45-0.7 results when multiplied with system time) than it may look like it has a pattern which it doesn't and it will be hard to find where is problem.
I am not saying CoH's random table works like this but its most probably a similiar algorithm which results in such behaviour and people are only seeing this behaviour, this doesn't mean system working wrong or right its not easy to tell this and if its really not dependant on participation as a metric than its almost impossible to see where is the problem (for example the ones I mentioned above) unless you have hundred-thousands of data if not milions. |
I consider it far more likely that the odds of seeing someone post about their drops are far higher if the drops happen to be very good or very bad, and therefore we hear a lot more from the statistical outliers here than we do from the people in the middle of the curve.
With thousands (likely tens of thousands) of players running trials you'd expect a small percentage to get odd results just through normal random chance, and those people will generally be the ones talking the loudest.
Cascade, level 50 Blaster (NRG/NRG since before it was cool)
Mechmeister, level 50 Bots / Traps MM
FAR too many non-50 alts to name
[u]Arcs[u]
The Scavenger Hunt: 187076
The Instant Lair Delivery Service: 206636
Quote:
Perhaps they are the same roll and half of them go to 100.00 and the other half go down to 00.00? Like rolling a D100 using 2 D10s. With PnP RPGs you cannot roll 0 so they are all treated as 100. Damn I feel old now.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Actually, its 0.00 through 100.00. 10,001 possible results, due to wraparound roundoff. 0.00 and 100.00 are about half as common as the other rolls.
|
Quote:
More likely they are generating a random real between 0 and 1, multiplying by 100, and rounding off to nearest 0.01. So all rolls lower than 0.005 round down to 0.00, and all rolls higher than 99.995 round up to 100.00.
|
Originally Posted by HelinCarnate
Perhaps they are the same roll and half of them go to 100.00 and the other half go down to 00.00? Like rolling a D100 using 2 D10s. With PnP RPGs you cannot roll 0 so they are all treated as 100. Damn I feel old now.
|
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Hehe that is pretty much what I meant using far less technical terms. It made sence up here but leave it to Arcannaville to articulate it for me.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HelinCarnate
Until we know the drop rates for sure saying x number of runs should get you Y is not always going to be correct either. Drawing conclusions from an extreemly small sample size will most times lead you to the wrong conclusion.
|
Unfortunately there is only one sample size that really matters: the one the player actually experiences. If you run the content 200 times and don't get the salvage you are looking for it doesn't matter if the odds were 50% or .0005%. You may not be in a position to judge how the system works, but you are in one to judge the tangible payouts it has provided you.
That is the dark side of random rewards as the main method of advancement; they're random, and some players are going to get unlucky by design. It is not unreasonable for people this actually happens to to have feelings about it, nor is it reasonable to say "Well your odds were the same as everyone else." To a player, it doesn't matter what the odds are if the odds never work out for her. It may not be true that some ATs get worse rewards than others, but some players do. It would be less of an issue if there were more ways to advance besides running the same two pieces of content over and over, but here we are.
Quote:
Are you implying that drop rates should change because peoples perceptions are incorrect? At least we can relax soon, because there will be 3 bits of content to run over and over and over......
|
Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
Unfortunately there is only one sample size that really matters: the one the player actually experiences. If you run the content 200 times and don't get the salvage you are looking for it doesn't matter if the odds were 50% or .0005%. You may not be in a position to judge how the system works, but you are in one to judge the tangible payouts it has provided you.
That is the dark side of random rewards as the main method of advancement; they're random, and some players are going to get unlucky by design. It is not unreasonable for people this actually happens to to have feelings about it, nor is it reasonable to say "Well your odds were the same as everyone else." To a player, it doesn't matter what the odds are if the odds never work out for her. It may not be true that some ATs get worse rewards than others, but some players do. It would be less of an issue if there were more ways to advance besides running the same two pieces of content over and over, but here we are. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HelinCarnate
Are you implying that drop rates should change because peoples perceptions are incorrect? At least we can relax soon, because there will be 3 bits of content to run over and over and over......
|
No. Yes. Maybe. Not really.
I feel the concept of "having the opinion that" is distinct from the concept of "actively campaigning for."
In any case, it is not a "matter of perception" that some people have never gotten a Very Rare. That is an inarguable fact. You do not need a statistically valid sample capable of explaining how the system works to draw conclusions about the value of rewards it actually provided. If we can point to a single case where someone went 200 runs without getting lucky, it is absolutely valid to draw a conclusion, for example, that "Running the content 200 times and still not getting a V Rare sucks." You do not need to know every possible ramification of a random system to know that some of its actual, observed outcomes are not ideal.
Quote:
That's true, they should include some form of 'merit' system where if you run the trails enough you are guaranteed and rare or very rare.
|
Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
. If we can point to a single case where someone went 200 runs without getting lucky, it is absolutely valid to draw a conclusion, for example, that "Running the content 200 times and still not getting a V Rare sucks." You do not need to know every possible ramification of a random system to know that some of its actual, observed outcomes are not ideal.
|
Quote:
Relying on E merits to get you the rares and very rares is unreasonable. It will take 184 E merits to get the 8 rares and 4 very rares required to get all 4 slots upgrade to Tier 4 abilities. That translates to 3 months of doing the 2 trials once per day or you'd have to complete a whole lot "Master of" trial runs which each individual player have quite little control over. |
Originally Posted by Chuckles07
That's true, they should include some form of 'merit' system where if you run the trails enough you are guaranteed and rare or very rare.
|
It's better to have a built in streak breaker just like the to hit rolls. For example, it can keep track of the past 20 trial completions by a particular character. If he(she) has gotten nothing but common/uncommons/threads, the next completion will automatically award either a rare or very rare table(50/50 chance) as the end reward option.
Actually for all we know, something like this could have already been implemented.
Quote:
I would typically leave threads off a purposed streak breaker, at least with the assumption that they aren't randomly distributed, and only really 'break' the ones that are randomly generated.|
Originally Posted by baron_inferno
Relying on E merits to get you the rares and very rares is unreasonable. It will take 184 E merits to get the 8 rares and 4 very rares required to get all 4 slots upgrade to Tier 4 abilities. That translates to 3 months of doing the 2 trials once per day or you'd have to complete a whole lot "Master of" trial runs which each individual player have quite little control over.
It's better to have a built in streak breaker just like the to hit rolls. For example, it can keep track of the past 20 trial completions by a particular character. If he(she) has gotten nothing but common/uncommons/threads, the next completion will automatically award either a rare or very rare table(50/50 chance) as the end reward option. Actually for all we know, something like this could have already been implemented. |
I think, in general, you're better looking at the V.Rares as the problem area in terms of E.Merits, just to get the e.merits for the v. rares you need a minimum of 120 runs, you should get a fair bit of rares in that time [while it is possible you won't, it's decreasingly likely].
Also, I don't think I'd really even be willing to spend the e.merits of a v.rare for Interface either, but again I'm mostly playing my traps MM, so the difference between the proc rates is pretty much moot to me.
Let's Dance!
Quote:
Why do people continue to quote how long it would take to do something with only one specific reward like there's a badge for doing it with your hands tied behind your back like that. It would take 184 trial runs minimum to get 184 empyrean merits, and long before then you'd probably have enough components to upgrades them into very rares.|
Originally Posted by baron_inferno
Relying on E merits to get you the rares and very rares is unreasonable. It will take 184 E merits to get the 8 rares and 4 very rares required to get all 4 slots upgrade to Tier 4 abilities. That translates to 3 months of doing the 2 trials once per day or you'd have to complete a whole lot "Master of" trial runs which each individual player have quite little control over.
|
Empyreans help, but the point is you're supposed to use your thread drops, your astrals, your empyreans, your component drops, and your earned iXP to unlock those slots and then slot powers into them. It is extremely difficut to contrive a scenario where it takes hundreds of trials to do that. On average, its going to be dozens to fill everything with tier 4s. Which is four times the effort it takes to fill with tier 3s, which almost always have an analog that is close to the strength of a comparable tier 4. In the worst case scenario where you're getting component drops at all, its still highly unlikely its going to take you a hundred runs to reach tier 4 in all slots. My blaster has enough resources to make at least three very rare powers in theory, having done less than 60 total trial runs and having never gotten a single very rare component drop. I was tier 3 slotted after less than twenty runs.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Considering the sequence of conversation I was commenting on, specifically the part about running 200 trials, the number I threw out there falls well within that parameter. I know it was a hyperbolic example but it was done to show that relying on E merit as the primary method to acquire Tier 4s is simply unrealistic. I would imagine most people would rather uninstall CoX as opposed to dealing with doing the 2 trials 100 times just to equip one character with Tier 4s, much less 200 repeats.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Why do people continue to quote how long it would take to do something with only one specific reward like there's a badge for doing it with your hands tied behind your back like that.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
It would take 184 trial runs minimum to get 184 empyrean merits, and long before then you'd probably have enough components to upgrades them into very rares.
|
Quote:
Maybe you don't need tier 4 of everything for every character right away? maybe the devs are gonna release more trials which will alleviate doing the same trials for most incarnate progress? maybe the devs are only so many people and can only produce so much content at once? maybe you should not run the same trials repeatedly and then blame the devs on your burnout? maybe most of us don't run the same trial hundreds of times with the same toon while not doing any thing else in between? just maybe......|
Originally Posted by baron_inferno
Considering the sequence of conversation I was commenting on, specifically the part about running 200 trials, the number I threw out there falls well within that parameter. I know it was a hyperbolic example but it was done to show that relying on E merit as the primary method to acquire Tier 4s is simply unrealistic. I would imagine most people would rather uninstall CoX as opposed to dealing with doing the 2 trials 100 times just to equip one character with Tier 4s, much less 200 repeats.
Let's not also forget the inf cost of these *upgrades*. Whether it is spending 400 million on one very rare of 1.6 billion for all four, the cost precludes many players from even considering that route. Certainly not if they have multiple level 50's to outfit with these new incarnate abilities. |
seriously stop running the Itrials constantly. run a few go do some other things. Test out some new incarnate power on regular missions/TFs. If you burn out you have only your self to blame.
I wouldnt unistall COX for the reason you stated but then I'm not the type of person that goes threw the motions for the shiny at the end of the rainbow. And this is coming from someone who quit COX because it didn't have an end game and I was bored. I''ll give you 3 guess what got my sub money back and the first two dont count
Quote:
The cost precludes many players because many players don't bother to sell their junk. Yes, the cost is a lot [numerically]. But that's more a consequence of the inflation at play in this game.|
Originally Posted by baron_inferno
Let's not also forget the inf cost of these *upgrades*. Whether it is spending 400 million on one very rare of 1.6 billion for all four, the cost precludes many players from even considering that route. Certainly not if they have multiple level 50's to outfit with these new incarnate abilities.
|
Also, an alt should take the same effort to level up/build up/whatever as any other character, although interestingly enough, the E. Merit system does actually benefit alt-heavy players a bit, since it's Real Time gated instead of Game Time gated.
Let's Dance!
Quote:
I have a couple of billions inf spread out amongst several characters so I could technically buy my way out of any bad dice rolls (so to speak) for several level 50s, let's say 4-5. That is, until I have to take into account the other 13-14 level 50's I have. From a numbers standpoint, it is still not much of an option for me if I happen to get on an unlucky streak on several characters.|
Originally Posted by reiella
The cost precludes many players because many players don't bother to sell their junk. Yes, the cost is a lot [numerically]. But that's more a consequence of the inflation at play in this game.
Also, an alt should take the same effort to level up/build up/whatever as any other character, although interestingly enough, the E. Merit system does actually benefit alt-heavy players a bit, since it's Real Time gated instead of Game Time gated. |
It's true that the E merit system do benefit alt heavy players though I haven't really had to go that route yet. I just haven't had much trouble with getting rares/very rares with my level 50s, except for one glaring exception. My MM has done about 30ish trial runs with only 2 rares to show for it (one of them was from MoBAF badge). This is after I've even tried running 16 player BAFs exclusively and gets nothing but uncommons while such approach normally nets me rares or very rares on other characters (Brutes/Corrs/Doms/VEATs). If the current trend continue, in order for my MM to slot some tier 4s, collecting E merits or spending inf for upgrades might be the only options left. It just kind of peeves me that for some reason, a supposedly "random" system is working for all (11 so far) except this one character of mine.
Quote:
For the record, I didn't complain about the repetitive nature of the end game system. In actuality, I have rather high tolerance for such things. Still, having to do 100 trials on a single character (over however long period of time) would be seriously pushing my patience threshold. |
Originally Posted by Lucky666
Maybe you don't need tier 4 of everything for every character right away? maybe the devs are gonna release more trials which will alleviate doing the same trials for most incarnate progress? maybe the devs are only so many people and can only produce so much content at once? maybe you should not run the same trials repeatedly and then blame the devs on your burnout? maybe most of us don't run the same trial hundreds of times with the same toon while not doing any thing else in between? just maybe......
seriously stop running the Itrials constantly. run a few go do some other things. Test out some new incarnate power on regular missions/TFs. If you burn out you have only your self to blame. I wouldnt unistall COX for the reason you stated but then I'm not the type of person that goes threw the motions for the shiny at the end of the rainbow. And this is coming from someone who quit COX because it didn't have an end game and I was bored. I''ll give you 3 guess what got my sub money back and the first two dont count |
I just don't necessarily agree with the opinion that the system is really as random as described. While I personally have not be an *extreme* victim of participation system bias or unlucky streak, whatever you want to call it, I could understand why some people would be frustrated.
This thread reminded me of this comic..
http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000...2318.strip.gif
Quote:
I dunno, I suspect it's coincidence. Admittedly I only really have tried with my MM, but I've gotten an seemingly normal rate out of that character.|
Originally Posted by baron_inferno
I have a couple of billions inf spread out amongst several characters so I could technically buy my way out of any bad dice rolls (so to speak) for several level 50s, let's say 4-5. That is, until I have to take into account the other 13-14 level 50's I have. From a numbers standpoint, it is still not much of an option for me if I happen to get on an unlucky streak on several characters.
It's true that the E merit system do benefit alt heavy players though I haven't really had to go that route yet. I just haven't had much trouble with getting rares/very rares with my level 50s, except for one glaring exception. My MM has done about 30ish trial runs with only 2 rares to show for it (one of them was from MoBAF badge). This is after I've even tried running 16 player BAFs exclusively and gets nothing but uncommons while such approach normally nets me rares or very rares on other characters (Brutes/Corrs/Doms/VEATs). If the current trend continue, in order for my MM to slot some tier 4s, collecting E merits or spending inf for upgrades might be the only options left. It just kind of peeves me that for some reason, a supposedly "random" system is working for all (11 so far) except this one character of mine. |
While it is possible there is a bias, it tends to sound like coincidence to me. Although maybe what I see as a normal rate is significantly worse than the average rate out there. But if that's the case, I should be happy with running my Brute and VEAT through the incarnate trials
.Only caveat I'd really say is not to put too much weight on 1 character out of 11 or 12 having 'bad luck'. Especially with MM since that tends to hit up against confirmation bias rather readily. Since it was known [by parts of the player base at least] that MMs had problems with the participation trackers in the Praetorian Zone Events, the idea began to cement itself.
Let's Dance!
I would be all for a 'streak breaker' type of code...after x amount of trials you get a very rare (or rare I guess...so far I haven't had issues getting rares on either my Defender or Tanker).
To be honest I thought I read somewhere on the forums that after 8 you'd get a very rare....I guess that's not the case heh.
And again, most people in beta were against the random pool chance...just for these reasons...random isn't 'random' enough for people especially when we don't know how things work.
Leader of The LEGION/Fallen LEGION on the Liberty server!
SSBB FC: 2062-8881-3944
MKW FC: 4167-4891-5991
On my ss/fire brute I used to get a few uncommons, mostly rares and a few VRs. In fact I got more VRs before the patch than I got commons.
Now on that same toon I get mostly uncommons and commons and sometimes rares and only once since the patch a very rare. This is after running it around 30 times before and about the same after on the same toon. What does that little bit of info tell us? At most, that the devs stated there was something wrong with the way "participation" was previously measured and now seems to be closer to something that is random with more lower end rewards than higher end rewards.
You know, knida like salvage how you see more commons than uncommons and more uncommons than rares. Or recipie drops how you see more commons than uncommons, more uncommons than rares and more rares than purples. Or even on reward tables for random rolls for recipies. You tend to get more crap recipies, even though they are all rares, than you do expensive recpies.
It seems like too many people just don't understand random rewards and the insane amount of data you need to not only figure out the drop tables, but to figure out if there is some bias that should not be there.