Fully Disclose of the actual chances for Trial Rewards.

I think it is high time that the developers disclose the following information as it serves no purpose to keep it secret:

Base chance for the BAF trial completion to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

Base chance for the Lambda trial completion to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

Base chance for the Keyes trial completion to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

Base chance for the Underground trial completion to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

Base chance for the TPN trial completion to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

Base chance for the Minds of Mayhem trial completion to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

Base chance for the Dilemma Diabolique trial completion (after Issue 22 goes live) to be:
Common:
Uncommon:
Rare:
Very Rare:

By keeping the percentages hidden, players cannot have trust that they are getting the correct rewards. For instance on numerous Keyes, TPNs, and MoMs I (and many others) have received common and uncommon reward tables. At one point a developer said that the increased odds at the rare and very rare tables were going to be visible enough that a player wouldn't need to look at the statistics to notice a change. Guess what? I need to look back through my run statistics to see if there is any change, and if anything my personal chances seems worse since the change.

There is no reason to hide these numbers from the players. It makes people unsure if they have participated "enough", will cause continued petitions from players asking why they are getting "poor" rewards, and prompt players to make bad play decisions in an attempt to "improve" their end of trial rewards.

Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters

I'm guessing they'll never share the numbers (could always be wrong).

My guess as to why they won't is for the same reason (my thought of the reason at least) as to why they won't say how long it "should" take someone to get to lvl 50 (from lvl 1).

Give people an inch and they take a foot...etc, etc...


Just keep records of what you got, when and from which itrial.


The only iTrial they've said something very specific is the UG where it's guaranteed a R/VR. I, too, have heard that some have received an C/UC from it but not sure how/why they got it. Beyond that...*shrugs*

Even if the devs were willing, and they never have been in the past, this might be a little trickier than implied. There may not be any "base" chances as such, because first its probably weights not percentages, and second the weights might be functions of the participation algorithm that don't have obvious "base" values. Understanding the base inputs and translating them into meaningful situational percentages might require knowing the details of the system.

What's potentially more problematic is the few people who know all the details - if *anyone* knows all the details precisely** - might be the very people who are not 100% certain what can be disclosed without accidentally giving away the store.

I volunteered once to hear the precise details of the system and independently verify that player observations are consistent with it (and for that matter if all dev claims about it were consistent with its implementation), but at the moment if I learn its precise details I would be barred from commenting on it.


** Its possible, given the code/data partition that exists in implementation.

Somewhat off topic and I know it's been suggested before but...still think there should be some 'reward' for completing all itrials to get a guaranteed R or...some mechanic "weekly itrial like the wst" reward....


*shrugs*

Oh and Rodion:

Quote:

If the devs gave those percentages it still wouldn't make any difference. Most human beings have no intuitive grasp of probability. Most believe that if they flip a coin 10 times, something must be seriously wrong if they all turned up heads. When you tell them that this is completely possible, with a probability of blah-blah-blah and and confidence interval of blah-blah-blah, they will look glassy-eyed and blame their "bad luck."

I think it is "bad luck"....I mean, I was just playing a little TF2 and for the 30 minutes that I played it, every time* the team I was on lost (doing capture the points)...and lost badly...

I think this proves that this is bad luck!




What?!

* Okay so the team I was on finally won the last game....I then immediately quit to end on a high note

Why? So when people find their numbers aren't matching with the percentages and the RNG is working against them, they'll still complain?

I just want the rewards to be given out fairly (kinda). My brute- no problem, My MM like many others..how am i gonna make a VR with commons n uncommons and the odd (odd!) Rare. I dont want to run x amount of times and spend mills just for 1 VR..

For what it's worth, there is a kind of streak breaker inherent in the existence of Empyrean Merits. However, I'll still agree that there's something that feels wrong to me about the ability for people to have better luck, and then to be free to spend those Empyreans on something else besides iProgress. I've never needed to spend Empyreans on components, for example.

There's also something that feels wrong about the weighting based on league "performance". Snow Globe and I have both posted our long-term reward rates, divided up by date. My sample set is larger than SG's, but by odds of Rare and Very Rare rewards over the long term seem noticeably higher than his. That could be "luck", but I suspect it also has something to do with the difference in the measured "performance" of leagues available to us on our respective servers. If that were really the case, it would strike me as particularly sucky that access to stronger leagues would have an additional dimension of influence over progress rates beyond the fairly obvious ones of running more trials and finishing them more quickly.

I seriously doubt it's going anywhere, but I'm not very satisfied with the broad nature of the iTrial reward scheme. (Unlike some others, I'm think I'm reasonably happy with the trials themselves.)

I'd like the see the official numbers on this as well, but it's unlikely that the devs will share them. As with many other things, us not knowing the real numbers lets the devs change them as they see fit without telling us.