Materia overmelding need an adjustment.

[Jojoya]

Sure, it felt bad when I lost 70 on a 7%. Then it felt good when my next 5% didn't lose any materia and the 5% after that only lost 2.

We're predisposed to remember the massive failures and not the successes. We know that advanced melding is a risk when we start. If we don't like the risk, then we can skip advanced melding.

[Draminicus]

The thing is overmeldinf isn’t needed for anything, what’s the point of neutering the materia market for something that’s purely optional even for self sufficient players when materia aren’t even hard to get....

To hq the 7.05 recipes reliably, you need overmelds. Materia is easy to get, but it's laborious. Some people only have 2 maybe 3 hours a day to play and enjoy the game, that includes doing msq, leveling other classes, rolos, raids, trials, farm, ect. Unchecked RNG ≠ difficult, it just punishes players with less time available to them.

Sure, it felt bad when I lost 70 on a 7%. Then it felt good when my next 5% didn't lose any materia and the 5% after that only lost 2.

We're predisposed to remember the massive failures and not the successes....

3 successes in 73 attempts is in fact acceptable.

As players, all we experience is small sample size. So that needs to be the focus for devs.

Not my SSs.



2 successes in 151 attempts, 3.92%. Meld stated 10% .



3 successes in 66 is 4.5% ish, if 5% attempt it's close enough, if a 7% it's tolerable.



0 successes, 58 attempts, stated 10%

Having trouble currently locating the SS of a poor soul's attempt, lost over 400 materia on a 10% chance.

The change would balance attempts in small sample sizes, aligning the individual closer to stated percentages.

A question that was asked: "Can a computer generate a truly random number?"

Steve Ward, Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, responded with:

"You can program a machine to generate what can be called “random” numbers, but the machine is always at the mercy of its programming. “On a completely deterministic machine you can’t generate anything you could really call a random sequence of numbers, because the machine is following the same algorithm to generate them. Typically, that means it starts with a common ‘seed’ number and then follows a pattern.” The results may be sufficiently complex to make the pattern difficult to identify, but because it is ruled by a carefully defined and consistently repeated algorithm, the numbers it produces are not truly random. “They are what we call ‘pseudo-random’ numbers,”

Until computers can generate true random numbers, without costly equipment that use unpredictable processes like thermal or atmospheric noise. A safety measure is needed to keep small averages close to expected results, as people do tend to fixate on big failures.