Square Enix's RNG

[Rivienne]

What did you do 300 times? All I saw was you mentioning AK, which any RNG factors therein are far more obscure than 98% HQ success rate, so I am not sure what one has to do with the other.

AK? No idea what you think you read, but I brought a specific test in my first post on thread of mining 100% chance nodes, and using unearth to increase HQ percentage. with a stated chance of 25%, I saw instead 38HQ over ~300 attempts (75 nodes total, so 300 is the minimum. It may be closer to 310 but for simplicity I rounded).

I am btw, neutral on this subject, I am not complaining, or defending the system. I am defending the possibility that the system is flawed however. Based on my experience and testing, the system seems flawed. That doesn't mean it is, but my one stated example was large enough to be meaningful, though not definitive. However for personal play, the system works good enough for me.

Regarding loot drop: I don't care at all. When stuff drops, better than my gear it is an oooh free upgrades moment. I don't go looking for them however, so I am not interested either way in chance rates of loot drop.

But gathering is very clean and easy test for the RNG system, which other people can easily test to backup or refute my numbers. Mine any 100% chance item with a 15% chance HQ over a sufficient sample size, of 50+ nodes. Use unearth consistently at every node to ensure that every node is given the same 25% chance at HQ. (25% is a good number of this type of test, because the sample size doesn't have to be prohibitively large to be meaningful). Count the total number of NQ and HQ at the end of the test. I would expect results of 18-25% HQ.

[Inquisitor]

My own personal experience is that, over time, HQ gathering percentages do tend to match the listed percentage. Not that my sample size is statistically significant, but NO single player (or even a couple of players comparing notes) is going to have a large enough sample size avoid being an outlier on the bell curve.

The displayed percentages may, in fact, be incorrect and I've been lucky. My experience is no more or less valid than others.