Math, Materia, and How to Succeed at Melding

[Alzelia]

nice post Alzelia,

the chance depends on base value of the first materia
let's say you are double melding iv int 16.
16+16 = 18% on nq
16+17 = 17.5% on nq
16+18 = 17% on nq
17+16 = 17% on nq
17+17 = 16% on nq

Nice info!! I'll def look into this more when I get home. I know I have a ton of mind on my retainer I'll experiment with. I really want to point out that the percentages we get in game seem 100% accurate to my calculations.

[Alzelia]

You could have people submit the information to this thread, and compile the data yourself.

Yeah, I think it would be easier if I collected all the data myself, that way I can be sure that no other mitigating circumstances were involved. What I want to do is SB 100 red coral rings and SB 100 electrum rings or a stat ring, and record exactly what they make. I'm not sure how large a dataset I would want.

[morpheus]

In response to the OP: "I believe that the numbers are accurate. I don't have any hard evidence"

From what I've seen the melding chances are not correct. It took me over 1200 materia to get my gamblers crown and a double meld with tier 1 materia is supposed to be around 42 percent chance. It wasn't even close to 42 percent, some times i would fail 35+ double melds in a row. I did keep track for a while and it seemed the average was about 15-20 percent chance. More closer to 15 percent imo but no where even close to 42 percent. It wasn't uncommon to fail 15 double melds in a row, finally get a double meld, then fail another 20 in a row.

The materia melding system is garbage. If you are unlucky you get screwed over while a small amount of people seem to consistently have good luck and reap the rewards from it. Would like to see a more balanced, less RNG system put in place.

P.S. This is a repost from another materia thread but i felt it applied to here too.

[AmyNeudaiz]

In response to the OP: "I believe that the numbers are accurate. I don't have any hard evidence"

-snip-

P.S. This is a repost from another materia thread but i felt it applied to here too.

And from that same thread in reply to that very post with the unrelated fat cut out.

Although I will say that on average spread out throughout the whole community, it's about right. But statistically you're gonna come across people such as yourself who get that unlucky draw where you just can't get anything to work most of the time and it's statistically probable that it's gonna happen to people.

[Madrox]

And from that same thread in reply to that very post with the unrelated fat cut out.

His post was related to what he was talking about and this thread.
Please don't start..

There hasn't yet been anybody from what I've seen test the success rates with large enough data of melds to truly say whether or not it is correct. Everybody gives up on recording the data. The theories are backed up by not very solid information. I personally believe that since it is an automated system within the game, it is very unlikely that it is even going to be wrong in the first place.

I think it would help knowing what the percentages are based upon (100 melds, 1000, 10,000) because I am 99% sure they are correct for the reason stated above. It would also be good to know if the that the melds count the percentages are based upon go for each person or serverwide. My guess would be the percentages are server wide and are based on a high count of melds which would open the possibility of a larger gap of players getting unlucky nonstop, and getting lucky a lot. If the percentages were based off smaller numbers, there's less likely the chance people would fail 20 times in a row.
Mix that with potentially multiple people reading around the same time. I don't have a background in statistics and could easily be wrong, that just makes sense to me as an explanation of what's going on for people like the guy above me. Hopefully I was able to explain that well enough.

This thread is definitely a step in the right direction to understanding it.

[Alzelia]

In response to the OP: "I believe that the numbers are accurate. I don't have any hard evidence"

From what I've seen the melding chances are not correct. It took me over 1200 materia to get my gamblers crown and a double meld with tier 1 materia is supposed to be around 42 percent chance. It wasn't even close to 42 percent, some times i would fail 35+ double melds in a row. I did keep track for a while and it seemed the average was about 15-20 percent chance. More closer to 15 percent imo but no where even close to 42 percent. It wasn't uncommon to fail 15 double melds in a row, finally get a double meld, then fail another 20 in a row.

The materia melding system is garbage. If you are unlucky you get screwed over while a small amount of people seem to consistently have good luck and reap the rewards from it. Would like to see a more balanced, less RNG system put in place.

P.S. This is a repost from another materia thread but i felt it applied to here too.

I appreciate the repost, I'm not going to read the other post.

Anyways you do bring up valid points. I have never attempted to meld with a materia lower than grade 3. Perhaps the melding percentage is off for grade 1 and 2 materia. I have to admit that I am rather dubious about your claim to have gone 35 melds in a row without success. At a 42% chance of success, you have a 1 in 200 million chance of failing 35 in a row. However, after a thousand + meld attempts, it is easily possible that 15-20 synths will fail in a row at close to that percentage.

And currently my numbers do slightly indicate triple melds are a lower percentage, but the difference is well within 2 standard deviations, so it is to be expected.

Also, one thing I do not believe many people understand is that the probability of a double meld occuring is completely independent of any attempts to meld you have done before them. If it says you have a 20% and you have failed the last 400 attempts, you still have a 20% chance.

[Alzelia]

His post was related to what he was talking about.
Please don't start..

There hasn't yet been anybody from what I've seen test the success rates with large enough data of melds to truly say whether or not it is correct. Everybody gives up on recording the data. The theories are backed up by not very solid information. I personally believe that since it is an automated system within the game, it is very unlikely that it is even going to be wrong in the first place.

I think it would help knowing what the percentages are based upon (100 melds, 1000, 10,000) because I am 99% sure they are correct for the reason stated above. It would also be good to know if the that the melds count the percentages are based upon go for each person or serverwide. My guess would be the percentages are server wide and are based on a high count of melds which would open the possibility of a larger gap of players getting unlucky nonstop, and getting lucky a lot. If the percentages were based off smaller numbers, there's less likely the chance people would fail 20 times in a row.
Mix that with potentially multiple people reading around the same time. I don't have a background in statistics and could easily be wrong, that just makes sense to me as an explanation of what's going on for people like the guy above me. Hopefully I was able to explain that well enough.

This thread is definitely a step in the right direction to understanding it.

The percentages are exactly that, the chance that you will successfully meld. The larger the playerbase the MORE likely that someone will have a terrible run of bad or good luck.

[Madrox]

Unfortunately if that is the case, then something like what you wrote in the OP could turn out not very accurate due to uncontrollable circumstances like other people melding but it would definitely explain morpheous's situation. **iI'm sure the system would be a bit more complex but my theory is likely a simplified explanation.

[Madrox]

The percentages are exactly that, the chance that you will successfully meld. The larger the playerbase the MORE likely that someone will have a terrible run of bad or good luck.

But with a smaller pool lets say 100 melds the chances would be better generally of giving successful melds? That almost makes them sound misleading, not incorrect percentages lol.

[morpheus]

I appreciate the repost, I'm not going to read the other post.

Anyways you do bring up valid points. I have never attempted to meld with a materia lower than grade 3. Perhaps the melding percentage is off for grade 1 and 2 materia. I have to admit that I am rather dubious about your claim to have gone 35 melds in a row without success. At a 42% chance of success, you have a 1 in 200 million chance of failing 35 in a row. However, after a thousand + meld attempts, it is easily possible that 15-20 synths will fail in a row at close to that percentage.

Well it did happen and it wasn't some fluke occurrence either. It's not like it went the other way, where i got 35 double melds in a row. Actually out of those 1200 materia I never got 3 double melds in a row but it was very common to fail 8+ double melds in a row if not more more.