Quote Originally Posted by Silverbane View Post
Every major programming language I know provides an adequate and dirt-simple to use pRNG function either built-in or as part of a standard library.
Could SE have screwed it up? Of course, there's nothing you can't screw up in software. But the odds that they've accidentally screwed it up in such a way that a reported 89% chance isn't an 89% chance is very low, and I don't see a reason why they would do it intentionally.
They could be doing something a silly as reseeding the RNG function based on seconds every time you strike. This greatly skews the true RNG nature of those functions. I am pretty sure they did not make such a rookie mistake though.