Game's RNG seems whack

[Castillan]

I don't mean that it generates long term averages that aren't statistically close to the average chances stated. Over a very long time of collecting and crafting, I've not seen the long term averages deviate to any great extent from the stated chances of success/failure.

No, what seems whack about it is the exceptionally long strings of extreme values that occur from time to time. Now, it's an RNG, as we all know, ANYTHING is possible, but in the last week I've been hit with chains of failures (more noticeable because I care about them more) that start to call into question the nature of the RNG at work.


I've had, on 3 separate occasions, chains of fails that statistically have less than 1 in a million chance of occurring, yet they occurred, three times, over a sample size of probably about 3000 events. This is not just I, many in my FC report similar things, that the long term averages seem okay, it's just the exceptionally long chains of extreme unlikeliness, that hit semi-frequently.

I'd like to see some discussion on this. I know it's an issue that's annoying a lot of people, and no, I haven't gathered explicit information, I just stop and calculate odds from time to time, and something does seem awry.

[EinSoFZ]

I can tell you that I've done Garuda HM over 80 times and I've only seen a bow drop once. Not an exaggeration one bit. I have however seen a plethora of SCH books...back to back to back. I'd be curious to know how SE programmed RNG for anything that uses it to determine drop or success rates etc.

[Welsper59]

I, along with many others, share your pain. The fact that consistent fails occur in large doses to pretty much everyone (which after is back to what should be higher amounts of success), is a bit of a red flag to something being wrong with the algorithm of the system. But maybe that's intentional (as there's never been any mention on it), or maybe that's how "random" works? /shrug Never figured random to be predictable though.

I can tell you that I've done Garuda HM over 80 times and I've only seen a bow drop once. Not an exaggeration one bit. I have however seen a plethora of SCH books...back to back to back. I'd be curious to know how SE programmed RNG for anything that uses it to determine drop or success rates etc.

Loot drops should be considered to run on a different system IMO. You can control success with crafting/gathering, you can't control loot drops (yet... THF? purty please!). Meaning the system has to adjust itself and rely on manipulable variables before it applies RNG. Plus, loot usually won't be 80-99% drop chance, whereas crafters/gatherers frequently find 80-99% success chance chain fail 4-8 times in a row. I have firsthand experience on that 8x fail with 95% success.

[Lurkios]

I've noticed this as well. I have both strings of failures and strings of success - but it seems a rare event that failure and success is evenly distributed.

[DSN]

There are tons of instances of 'broken math' in this game. The other day gathering I decided to log each attempt and do the math, at 72% success rate and 1000 attempts you would expect around 720 items gathered ... was 513 thats 51.3% way off from 72%, it gets worse when I do the math for my HQ rates.

[Castillan]

I, along with many others, share your pain. The fact that consistent fails occur in large doses to pretty much everyone (which after is back to what should be higher amounts of success),

One example I had was 8 fails out of 9, on Hasty Touch, with Steady Hand 2 up (80% success rate). There's a 0.000256% chance to have 8 or more fails out of 9 tries.
On another long crafting attempt, I had 9 SH2/HT fails out 13 tries, which in itself there is a 0.0000279% chance to have 9 or more fails out of 13.
Or just today, mining, 7 fails in a row at 73% chance, which is a 0.01% chance of occurring.

I've also had 8xSH2/HT fails out of 12. And 6 fails out of 11 occur, and 5 x SH2/HT fails in a row.

An RNG is such that the any one or two of those events occurring is to be expected, but to have all 6, over the period of a week, says to me that something is wrong.

[YuriRamona]

One example I had was 8 fails out of 9, on Hasty Touch, with Steady Hand 2 up (80% success rate). There's a 0.000256% chance to have 8 or more fails out of 9 tries.
On another long crafting attempt, I had 9 SH2/HT fails out 13 tries, which in itself there is a 0.0000279% chance to have 9 or more fails out of 13.
Or just today, mining, 7 fails in a row at 73% chance, which is a 0.01% chance of occurring.

I've also had 8xSH2/HT fails out of 12. And 6 fails out of 11 occur, and 5 x SH2/HT fails in a row.

An RNG is such that the any one or two of those events occurring is to be expected, but to have all 6, over the period of a week, says to me that something is wrong.

Everyone put on your tinfoil hats!!!

[Bizniztyme]

There are tons of instances of 'broken math' in this game. The other day gathering I decided to log each attempt and do the math, at 72% success rate and 1000 attempts you would expect around 720 items gathered ... was 513 thats 51.3% way off from 72%, it gets worse when I do the math for my HQ rates.

You do know just because it 72% success rate doesn't mean that you will get 720/1000 right? It's a 72% chance each time you make a swing. But, I do agree, RNG can be rough in this game. lol

[Welsper59]

There are tons of instances of 'broken math' in this game. The other day gathering I decided to log each attempt and do the math, at 72% success rate and 1000 attempts you would expect around 720 items gathered ... was 513 thats 51.3% way off from 72%, it gets worse when I do the math for my HQ rates.

I honestly think HQ rates run on a different algorithm from general success percentage, at least when dealing with HQ gathering. I'm assuming it's normal to frequently HQ lower level gathering nodes, as the one time I did that, I had what seemed to be ~50% HQ rate, despite it saying 15%. So if level/gear really does matter that much, despite what game statistics are visibly shown to us, that means there are additional factors besides baseline RNG.

Failures seem to run on a different formula though, as regardless of how low a % of failure it might be, it will always happen at higher rates than a low % of success. Give it a try, see how often you'll encounter a 5-10% fail, compared to a 5-10% success. Not exactly something you can do with gathering though, I think, but rather something you can do with crafting (or comparing percentages between both). It's still probably an RNG thing mind you, but there just might be additional RNG factors in place.

[YuriRamona]

I honestly think HQ rates run on a different algorithm from general success percentage, at least when dealing with HQ gathering.

This is definitely the case. Someone out there wrote the algorithm so that the actual percentage chance is 15% lower than what is written, but it says that the success rate is normal.

#RNGConspiracy