This game has seriously messed up RNG

[Felis]

Except that equipment plays no factor in the RNG, for crafting at least.

Your failure rate on a level 1 recipe is the same in full HQ ironworks as in level 1 equipment.

With HQ ironwork you will get the chance for HQ to 100% without any trouble. Who would fail to get a HQ from a lv1 recipe with that equip?
The equip play a role, because the better the equip the easier it is to get 100% or at least to come really near that 100%

[Llus]

im sorry missing 5 hits with a 99 percent success rate is neither true nor random.

If you flip a coin and it lands heads up 200 times in a row, what are the odds it will land heads up on the next filp?

50% - previous results have no effect on subsequent attempts

[Atoli]

If you flip a coin and it lands heads up 200 times in a row, what are the odds it will land heads up on the next filp?
50% - previous results have no effect on subsequent attempts

Yeah, but the odds of getting 201 times heads and zero times tails are extremely low, because if the chance is actually 50:50, over a very large sample size, you will end up getting a fairly balanced result.
As for ADVSS's example: The chances to win the jackpot in my country are 0,00000071% and it still happens every few months. As long as the chance is not zero, it can absolutely happen, even if it is very very unlikely to occur.

[Llus]

Yeah, but the odds of getting 201 times heads and zero times tails are extremely low, because if the chance is actually 50:50, over a very large sample size, you will end up getting a fairly balanced result.
As for ADVSS's example: The chances to win the jackpot in my country are 0,00000071% and it still happens every few months. As long as the chance is not zero, it can absolutely happen, even if it is very very unlikely to occur.

My point exactly - even if you have a 99% chance for a win; you can still lose many times in a row. Do 50000 touches with a 99% chance of success, you'll have roughly 500 failures. But RNG isn't based on odds vs prior results, it's as true a random as can be with computers.

[JCharms]

I dislike the crafting in this game because if it.
In most games you usually get better at your craft as you go, here? they just add more layers of RNG.

[TarynH]

I dislike the crafting in this game because if it.
In most games you usually get better at your craft as you go, here? they just add more layers of RNG.

I agree. When you first start gathering/crafting, it's like "this is fun." Then it progressively gets more RNG heavy. Fishing happens to be the worst with it, imo. Especially when you get into mooching. Like the next size fish is really that picky about wanting a HQ fish on the hook.

[Iromi]

Yup, I've been playing since day 1 in 1.0 and noticed this.

90%+ always is failure or miss....as far as crafting and gathering goes. When it comes to material melding, 5% and I get it first chance. It's stupid really...

[Nixxe]

The randomness of Hasty Touch can be a bit annoying, but I suppose that's the penalty for not costing CP, aside from Steady Hand I/II anyway.

Either way, there's nothing at odds with proper randomness about getting a long streak of failures with any sub-100% chance. In fact, if you couldn't get such a streak, it would be less genuinely random. Assuming the nominal odds are the actual odds (80%), then getting nine failures in a row has a 5.12 * 10^(-4)% chance of happening, but no matter how inclined you might be to round it to zero, it's still non-zero and as such a streak of that nature is part of the overall 50% chance of Hasty Touch.

[Yukiko]

The main mistake in calculating your % is that the server use ONE RNG for ALL players. If it says 99% it means not only for you, it means the "next" roll. That means you actually will never have the 99% because there will always be some others who finish the same craft/dungeon/loot before you! That results in seeing from your perspective many more odds than it should have! SE does not have any net to catch odd bias. The next mistake is that SE uses an algorithm for high numbers (you remember, one RNG for all players) but you are just a single player from that high number. As example you are number 254 from a total number of 123.456.789 rolls made at same time! Statistically when counting all rolls, RNG is working fine, but for YOU it will result in seeing more odd bias.

There isnt an easy way to fix that because we need a high number RNG, you cant have "one little server" for each player! Thats why most games use a program code that works as filter (or net) to catch odd bias results.

Edit: In add we have a Server/Client problem, if you give the client more "power" it will result in cheating. You need to balance and ask if players who cheat will mess up the overall game or not? (Example: RNG is not only for crafting/loot, its for damage calculations or any other mechanic too. So, does it hurt more when players cheat best gear or when they cheat to auto kill boss? You need to find balance and ask yourself what is actually more gamebreaking)

[Ar4093]

The main mistake in calculating your % is that the server use ONE RNG for ALL players. If it says 99% it means not only for you, it means the "next" roll. That means you actually will never have the 99% because there will always be some others who finish the same craft/dungeon/loot before you! That results in seeing from your perspective many more odds than it should have! SE does not have any net to catch odd bias. The next mistake is that SE uses an algorithm for high numbers (you remember, one RNG for all players) but you are just a single player from that high number. As example you are number 254 from a total number of 123.456.789 rolls made at same time! Statistically when counting all rolls, RNG is working fine, but for YOU it will result in seeing more odd bias.

Except this isn't how random numbers work. Each number is completely independent from the previous one.