Field Commander set: can the requirements to earn it be reviewed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathleen_

It was rhetorical.

---

Rhetorical only really works when the implied answer is unambiguous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Rhetorical only really works when the implied answer is unambiguous.

---

It is unambiguous though. There's a 50/50 for it to be either side but you have to make a decision. In a small set getting the same side thrice in a row is a less likely occurrence than getting the same side twice in a row, so the logical decision is to bet on hads. Before you bring up the gambler's fallacy, no, that's believing that the chance of getting tails is higher. It's not "smarter", it's just playing around RNG in game theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathleen_

In a small set getting the same side thrice in a row is a less likely occurrence than getting the same side twice in a row, so the logical decision is to bet on hads. Before you bring up the gambler's fallacy, no, that's believing that the chance of getting tails is higher. It's not "smarter", it's just playing around RNG in game theory.

---

No, that absolutely is gambler's fallacy. You're saying that it is more likely to be tails because the previous two were heads.

If you were asked to bet before any coins are flipped whether there will be three heads or two and a tail, you'd be more sensible to bet on the mix. But once the two heads have been produced, the third flip is still 50/50. The universe does not care that the previous two flips came up heads.

And, as I said, your rhetorical question was ambiguous whether you were expecting the reader to think the answer is "you should bet on tails" or "it's still 50/50". Rhetorical questions don't work if the person you're asking might not follow the same logic as you.


Edit: Okay, no, you wrote that heads was more likely. That makes even less sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

No, that absolutely is gambler's fallacy. You're saying that it is more likely to be tails because the previous two were heads.

If you were asked to bet before any coins are flipped whether there will be three heads or two and a tail, you'd be more sensible to bet on the mix. But once the two heads have been produced, the third flip is still 50/50. The universe does not care that the previous two flips came up heads.

And, as I said, your rhetorical question was ambiguous whether you were expecting the reader to think the answer is "you should bet on tails" or "it's still 50/50". Rhetorical questions don't work if the person you're asking might not follow the same logic as you.


Edit: Okay, no, you wrote that heads was more likely. That makes even less sense.

---

I literally said that it's 50% for either side. lol You're talking about classical probability in a closed mathematical setting, I'm talking about game theory decision making because my original point was about node spawns: you have two sides at the same chance of occurring, why did you pick one over the other? You have multiple nodes spread throughout the map at the same chance of occurring at fixed intervals of time, why did you preposition near that node specifically?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathleen_

I literally said that it's 50% for either side. lol You're talking about classical probability in a closed mathematical setting, I'm talking about game theory decision making because my original point was about node spawns: you have two sides at the same chance of occurring, why did you pick one over the other? You have multiple nodes spread throughout the map at the same chance of occurring at fixed intervals of time, why did you preposition near that node specifically?

---

You are literally agreeing its RNG then lmfao

There are a lot of premades in seal rock because many people wants their jacket.

As a fully solo player I always try to tell people where and how to avoid getting pinched. Using waymarks as well or <se.x> to tell the raid to move or defend. IT always does a difference instead of complaining about the RNG in shout chat.

When a team have all the nodes (for example in the beach) let's say 3 ; they will make the mistake of trying to defend them all, its the perfect opportunity to strike from behind but this almost never happens , people in PVP/FL plays very passively and will cry when they don't get a "lucky" node on their side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Towa-Musa

You are literally agreeing its RNG then lmfao

---

I said it like, 15 posts ago. lmao
My whole point is that you're supposed to play around it instead of crying and pissing yourself in alliance chat because spawns don't go in your favour 100% of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathleen_

<Angry lizard noises.>

---

oop now you're just trying to insult people XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnnRam

There are a lot of premades in seal rock because many people wants their jacket.

As a fully solo player I always try to tell people where and how to avoid getting pinched. Using waymarks as well or <se.x> to tell the raid to move or defend. IT always does a difference instead of complaining about the RNG in shout chat.

When a team have all the nodes (for example in the beach) let's say 3 ; they will make the mistake of trying to defend them all, its the perfect opportunity to strike from behind but this almost never happens , people in PVP/FL plays very passively and will cry when they don't get a "lucky" node on their side.

---

i can confirm that complaining about the bad RNG in shout does nothing to help, seen people do it while i shrugged and continued to kill 5 people with one lb.
but you WILL admit that theres a Heavy element of RNG that CAN effect the tide of battle because the system for what ever reason favors one side of the map for half the match.... riiight?

Honestly, I'm starting to wonder how frequently people here have finished games where the teams scores were less than 100 points. (Bonus morale if the team manages to finish with nothing and still types gg lol)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Towa-Musa

i can confirm that complaining about the bad RNG in shout does nothing to help, seen people do it while i shrugged and continued to kill 5 people with one lb.

---

Getting salty in alliance chat does nothing but inform everyone to ignore anything you say. No one likes a whiner.

My policy is to either be constructive or be silent. I'll usually try to be helpful with linking map pins and stuff. But if I keep getting bad teams, I just usually switch my alliance chat off entirely and just focus on taking my frustrations out on the other team :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Towa-Musa

i can confirm that complaining about the bad RNG in shout does nothing to help, seen people do it while i shrugged and continued to kill 5 people with one lb.
but you WILL admit that theres a Heavy element of RNG that CAN effect the tide of battle because the system for what ever reason favors one side of the map for half the match.... riiight?

---

Hey we finally agree to something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gserpent

Getting salty in alliance chat does nothing but inform everyone to ignore anything you say. No one likes a whiner.

My policy is to either be constructive or be silent. I'll usually try to be helpful with linking map pins and stuff. But if I keep getting bad teams, I just usually switch my alliance chat off entirely and just focus on taking my frustrations out on the other team :P

---

i mean, its better to just kill people and have fun really since you're more likely to play better if you do that. i mean thats how i got my coat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathleen_

I said it like, 15 posts ago. lmao
My whole point is that you're supposed to play around it instead of crying and pissing yourself in alliance chat because spawns don't go in your favour 100% of the time.

---

feels bad being 100% guilty of doing this (especially in seal rock). uh oh

The reward system on this map does need a rework.
Even if you try to guide players, they will not always work in the Alliance best interests.
I think I've played more than 22 games over the last couple of weeks, and I've only won two of them.

The other maps are way more equitative, even with the random factor (I am already close to 300 victories in Onsal Hakair for example). But this one is just utterly painful

Honestly, with wolf collars being a thing again, I feel like they could just take all of the achievement mount/item rewards and just make them cost wolf collars instead. Since it's an exchange rate of 1000 crystals to 1 collar, that seems fair. Maybe make the mounts cost like 20 or 30 collars? That would represent a large investment into PvP activity, but at the user's discretion.