Please do something about it already.

[Mhaeric]

You said (and I quoted) that 7/8 is "a good enough approximation". It's not an approximation, it's the exact output of the calculation of the more realistic scenario and it leads back to the logic: three people in that raid are going to win a chest.

I was referring to 7/8 being a good enough approximation in the context of the (23/24)^3 value being a technically more accurate even though unrealistic value. I can see how I phrased it was ambiguous.

Those momentary chances are going to fluctuate but they don't matter in the end.

I'm not sure why you seem to think I'm saying otherwise since I've brought up sample size rendering the roll meaningless in the long term several times.

And the fact that someone technically can be eligible for all three rolls by deliberately deleting each chest as they win it is irrelevant on an average run. There would have to be someone out to do it and they'd have to be the winner of every roll for it to make even a minor difference.

Yes, that's what I said.

[Iscah]

Yes, that's what I said.

So why are you basing your maths on that scenario instead of the realistic one where the first two winners are locked out of subsequent rolls, for which the equation leads to exactly 0.875 instead of a rough approximation?