This game has seriously messed up RNG

[Frizze]

The fact that your gathering rate on Hidden Nodes is capped at 95% and you STILL miss 1 or 2 or even 3 hit sin a row at 95% is completely unacceptable!!

Yeah, 3 misses at a 95% success rate is only a 1 in 8000 event. How many people across all the servers are making similar attempts in any given day? Its bound to happen to someone, it just sucks when its you.

[MN_14]

The fact that your gathering rate on Hidden Nodes is capped at 95% and you STILL miss 1 or 2 or even 3 hit sin a row at 95% is completely unacceptable!!

Missing 3 in a row at 95% is uncommon (I've rarely seen it if ever; maybe once), but if you're swinging 5 times at 95%, you'll see single misses regularly.

Statistically, there is close to a 25% chance that you will see 1 or more misses out of 5 swings. So on average, you'd expect 1 out of 4 of your hidden nodes to have one or more missed swings.

This seems to be in line with my experiences when I did gather before. However, most of the times I gathered at 100% so my own sample size is limited.

[Niwashi]

I used to think these sort of threads were simply people not understanding how random numbers can create streaks or simply people remembering failures more easily than successes. But having recently made a new alt and going through the early levels of crafting several times, I'm now not quite so sure.

It seems like Basic Touch has a far greater success rate once you outlevel the recipe you're making than it does before. Five levels above the recipe and it'll only occasionally miss (about as you'd expect). Yet a level below the recipe, it fails more often than it succeeds. The tooltip doesn't acknowledge any such dependency on level. It claims you get a simple 70% success rate, but the change was pretty consistent and predictable. What's more, it occurred only with the Basic Touch, and not with Basic Synthesis, which actually does seem to maintain its stated 90% success rate throughout.

So while the game seems capable of a good random number generator, I'm no longer convinced that all the tooltips and other windows that specify a success rate are really telling the whole story. It seems more like "Success Rate: 70%" can in some cases mean that if you meet other (unstated) requirements, then it will use a 70% chance RNG.

(And after all, it's not like all the game's other tooltips and explanations are kept accurate. I'm pretty sure the Active Help description of the armory bonus still claims it depends on how far apart your levels are, which has never been the case, and people have been pointing out that discrepancy ever since the game started.)

[Maxsdad]

Stat Trek's Random Number Generator is the closest thing you'll find to a TRUE RNG, what you see most of the time (especially in games) are called "pseudo random number generators" and, to put it simply, they work like this. Without looking at the faces, try to pull a "5" from a deck of 52 cards, and then try to pull the same "5"card from the same deck with all the court cards (face cards) removed and only the 40 pip (number) cards remaining. You're still pulling randomly for a specific outcome (the "5" card), but the ODDS have been manipulated by removing 12 of the cards. This is called a "manipulated variable" where you affect the RNG by changing the variables it works with. The game is just "fudging" the odds. Cuss it out and move on.

[IllyriaKnotfred]

I once missed six 97% chance gathers on the same node. I really should have bought a lottery ticket lol

[Acidblood]

i've seen this and from my personal experience since i moved from NA to JP server, I can't win a loot roll to save my life. constant roll losses when rolling 95+. If i don't roll a 99, i can just forget about it.

Did you set your language to JP (apparently it helps )?

Joking aside, I've also noticed a lot of streaks in the RNG system, but it does seem to be balanced over time (i.e. for each 99% failure, I have gotten a 1% success at some point, though usually not when I needed it). One positive side effect of these streaks, at least from the small experiment I have done so far, is that it may be easier to get melds on while you're on a lucky streak (e.g. after getting multiple HQ garthers in a row)... it's not perfect of course, but from the dozen or so 10-16% melds I have done so far while on a 'lucky streak', I am greatly exceeding the odds, and my expectations from previous melding experience.

[hamond]

no matter which way you want to play it, the fact stands. when you are failing 2/4 or 3/6 and so on with a 90% chance of success showing that is wrong. Period. If you are going to show a 90% chance of success I expect a 90% chance of success you either show it right or fix the system. there is no way around it.

You dont ignore the chance of success wtf. and you have to BOLD that. WTF. YOU ARE JUST SAYING BECAUSE YOU WANT PPL TO SHUT UP. THAT IS WRONG.

There is a larger randomness/variance to it so that even a very high chance of success still offer ample chance for failure. The system and the explanation/description does not add up. There is ample prove. STOP ARGUING ITS ACTUALLY CORRECT. IT IS WRONG IT IS WRONG IT IS WRONG. GET THAT INTO YOUR HEAD. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ARGUE. THERE IS NO DEFENCE. YOU DO NOT DISPUTE FACT.

[GunksFoy]

There is a larger randomness/variance to it so that even a very high chance of success still offer ample chance for failure. The system and the explanation/description does not add up. There is ample prove. STOP ARGUING ITS ACTUALLY CORRECT. IT IS WRONG IT IS WRONG IT IS WRONG. GET THAT INTO YOUR HEAD. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ARGUE. THERE IS NO DEFENCE. YOU DO NOT DISPUTE FACT.

Actually, you are wrong in this case. This is RNG, not percentage based success. The 90% you see is the chance you have a in a single instance. otherwise, every 90 hits you would miss 10 in a row. Is this what you want? You want to miss 10 hits guaranteed every 90 hits? I sure don't. Personally, I don't miss much at above 90% and often see HQ/gathering successes at the 40-60% area. If you don't like RNG, I suggest you find something besides an MMO to play.

[Elamys]

no matter which way you want to play it, the fact stands. when you are failing 2/4 or 3/6 and so on with a 90% chance of success showing that is wrong. Period. If you are going to show a 90% chance of success I expect a 90% chance of success you either show it right or fix the system. there is no way around it.

This is a very common logical fallacy that often shows up in gambling, called the Monte Carlo or gambler's fallacy. A good way to sum it up is this - roulette players who notice that it keeps landing on black will bet on red because "it's a 50/50 chance, red HAS to show up soon." But it's only a 50/50 chance for each individual spin, not overall, so it causes people to lose money. It's actually a pretty interesting subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

Same logic applies here. Each hasty touch or whatever you take is a 90% chance, with a 10% chance to fail. So yes, it IS correct that you can fail that many times on a 90% chance of success. Again, you are ignoring times when the RNG was wonderful and amazing and you finished with every single hasty touch succeeding. Instead of screeching at people for being wrong when they're correct, consider rotations or abilities you can use to smooth out the RNG even further.

[hamond]

Actually, you are wrong in this case. This is RNG, not percentage based success. The 90% you see is the chance you have a in a single instance. otherwise, every 90 hits you would miss 10 in a row. Is this what you want? You want to miss 10 hits guaranteed every 90 hits? I sure don't. Personally, I don't miss much at above 90% and often see HQ/gathering successes at the 40-60% area. If you don't like RNG, I suggest you find something besides an MMO to play.

The problem is not that its failing in a single instance. The problem is that its failing in alot more instances than it should. If you are suggesting a 90% chance it should be alot closer. You should not be failing this much. 90% is only an example, you do hell lot worse if you are under that percentage. The whole system is severely underperforming.