Quote Originally Posted by Tiggy View Post
As you say this is entirely your perception, and that perception is always biased. Specifically, human perception draws greater attention to things that fail or disappoint
Actually, I only inserted myself into this thread to insert some hard numbers of a reasonable quantity to be potentially meaningful. I performed a specific test to determine usefulness of unearth given the need for cordial/waiting for GP (not to find a flaw in the system): those results are large enough that they appear to show a skew in the system. You have deemed those numbers not enough (or not noticed them), that is fair, I already said they aren't enough to make a definitive conclusion: but that they are suspect.

I do in fact have hard experience with this type of system, so I am not exactly speaking in ignorance, but more... I am not sure why there is this huge push back against the possibility of this system being flawed. It is very hard to get a reasonable approximation of probability distribution right, and mistakes can easily happen.

Naturally people who are frustrated will complain: but that doesn't mean they don't have a potentially valid complaint. "Numbers or it didn't happen!" "More numbers or it didn't happen!" "ALL the numbers or it didn't happen."

Probability and statistics is about not needing all the numbers, just a sufficiently large sample size. I performed a test of a reasonable size to suggest there may in fact be a problem. I agree more numbers should be done independently to attempt to validate them. That doesn't mean my numbers, or my for the purpose of game play conclusions based on them, are not worth mention until then.