90% sucess rate and still missing

[NefGP]

It's a statistical anomaly and it's why I despise the RNG with every fiber of my being.

In theory yes, you should only be missing 1/10 swings, but in practice it never works that way. Diablo 2 used to make me want to break my keyboard because I'd have a 95% hit rate and somehow miss 10+ swings consecutively.

[Dakre]

OP is just frustrated, so I can understand it because I've felt the same. But if you think it isn't working correctly and they think it's fine, how do you prove a random chance is not so random? The other question is, if it happens that often, how many times an hour/day does it happen?

The reason behind those questions is to clarify the difficulty of fixing it, because if you take a random number generator and get similar results, you proved yourself wrong. If you get different results with the same number of tries, then you still have to prove their system isn't a 90% hit rate. Otherwise, people don't care as much without proof, cause ideas are a dime a dozen.

[Conradus]

OP is just frustrated, so I can understand it because I've felt the same. But if you think it isn't working correctly and they think it's fine, how do you prove a random chance is not so random?

By accurately recording all results as they happen, getting a statistically significant sample (you'll want thousands of results, at a minimum), and subjecting your data to a rigorous statistical analysis.

[Dakre]

By accurately recording all results as they happen, getting a statistically significant sample (you'll want thousands of results, at a minimum), and subjecting your data to a rigorous statistical analysis.

That would show the statistics of the chance, which would give someone an good estimate on the actual chance. The only problem is actually proving that it's the way they designed it. As soon as they say they use their programming language's random number generator, that adds another element to whether that's correct or if it's FFXIV's code. The point is proving they designed it wrong and can fix it.

[CJReece]

Every time you have a chanced system (i.e; 10%, 20%,55%) its not going to stay cumulative, it resets every swing, and you could be super lucky have a 10% chance, with a 5% chance HQ and hit it twice, its not something that stacks.

[Conradus]

That would show the statistics of the chance, which would give someone an good estimate on the actual chance. The only problem is actually proving that it's the way they designed it. As soon as they say they use their programming language's random number generator, that adds another element to whether that's correct or if it's FFXIV's code. The point is proving they designed it wrong and can fix it.

Define "they designed it wrong".

Regardless, a rigorous analysis will show if there's a problem. It won't show where the problem is, but that's secondary. If there's a problem, it is the responsibility of the design team to fix it, regardless whether it's in their code or not. If the RNG is faulty (and there are a lot of subpar RNGs out there), then they'll need to replace it. You're not tied to the RNG in the library provided by the language you're coding in. In fact, the builtin RNGs in a lot of languages are notoriously poor, and they're probably already using an outside library to provide their RNG.

[Accolades]

Seriously? 99% you can still miss. You can still miss 100 times in a row because there is always 1%, but I am sure you know that I hope.

[Astarica]

The whole 'sample size' is really a pet peeve of mine. If you really got 12 misses in a row with 90%, that's not a small sample. The chance of that happening is 1 trillion in 1. It is a virtual statistical impossibility. If you have proof this actually happened I can almost certainly agree with you that the RNG is indeed messed up. Though I'm sure failing 12 times in a row at 90% didn't actually happen and is only an exaggeration.

At any rate the whole RNG being good or not completely misses the point. Let's say we have a coin flip simulator and all my RNG really does is gives the result opposite of the last roll made by the server, so it just alternates between heads and tails forever. Must be a pretty bad RNG right? No, because after you rolled once, you don't know if there are 0, 1, or 100 guys who since then requested a coin flip to my server, so to you there is no pattern despite the RNG is 100% predictable.

[HiryuYuuki]

Sometimes I got 4 miss on 95% success rate, I think that just bad luck lol

[Geobryn]

i got 5 HQs on +1 node with 10% HQ chance, and it happend to me 2 times in one day of farming
all i can say is, thank you for my HQs !!!