[Transparency request] Publish the RNG engine of the lottery system

[dutiona]

Do we need proof of that fairness?

Admittedly I don't know what the numbers are on how many successes there were and how many got the zero glitch, but the number of complaints with the system is naturally skewed to be 100% made up of people who got zero. The people whose lottery result was a real number have no reason to speak up.

As far as I'm concerned, if they can prove that the system did fair draws then I'll consider every plot winner legitimate. They won the lottery against N+1 bidder, N being the actual number of other tickets than theirs and +1 for the 0 ticket.
If they cannot prove this fairness, and the graph shows for instance that the tickets 2 or 0 was drawn a lot more that the other tickets then I (and we should all) demand a rollback because the system was not fair at all.

[Menriq]

As far as I'm concerned, if they can prove that the system did fair draws then I'll consider every plot winner legitimate. They won the lottery against N+1 bidder, N being the actual number of other tickets than theirs and +1 for the 0 ticket.
If they cannot prove this fairness, and the graph shows for instance that the tickets 2 or 0 was drawn a lot more that the other tickets then I (and we should all) demand a rollback because the system was not fair at all.

I didn't win what I bid for, and I was #1. I doubt your "demand" is going to happen. Assuming you have some development experience, I'll let you figure out why you aren't going to get your rollback.

[Iscah]

There is also the question of chance though. They didn't know they were bidding against the system as well. Maybe a FC bids multiple times on one house only then instead of spreading out bids, since they were bidding against +1 on every plot.

Wasn't the system already discouraging FCs from bidding on multiple plots? I thought I'd read people were risking forfeiting the whole deposit if the FC won multiple houses and didn't want the second one.

If they cannot prove this fairness, and the graph shows for instance that the tickets 2 or 0 was drawn a lot more that the other tickets then I (and we should all) demand a rollback because the system was not fair at all.

I still don't see the need to demand this simply on the fact that some percentage of people are complaining that they got a zero. There are naturally far more people going to speak up about their lottery producing a zero than any other number, and even if you could get all the stats about what number was rolled in every single lottery, it definitely is going to look skewed because the rolls aren't all on the same range. You would likely see more zeroes and ones than twos, and more twos than elevens, and more elevens than thirties, just because less plots have that many people bidding on them.

There'd be just as much chance of the lottery looking like this, minus the zeroes and mass complaints about them, if things had proceeded normally. Would you feel the need to demand the formulas then?

[Moonlite]

Wasn't the system already discouraging FCs from bidding on multiple plots? I thought I'd read people were risking forfeiting the whole deposit if the FC won multiple houses and didn't want the second one.

You only lose gil if win multiple. Gil is easy to make and doesn't have much use in the game besides house/glamour. This game will only ever have so many large plots.

[dutiona]

Wasn't the system already discouraging FCs from bidding on multiple plots? I thought I'd read people were risking forfeiting the whole deposit if the FC won multiple houses and didn't want the second one.




I still don't see the need to demand this simply on the fact that some percentage of people are complaining that they got a zero. There are naturally far more people going to speak up about their lottery producing a zero than any other number, and even if you could get all the stats about what number was rolled in every single lottery, it definitely is going to look skewed because the rolls aren't all on the same range. You would likely see more zeroes and ones than twos, and more twos than elevens, and more elevens than thirties, just because less plots have that many people bidding on them.

There'd be just as much chance of the lottery looking like this, minus the zeroes and mass complaints about them, if things had proceeded normally. Would you feel the need to demand the formulas then?

Yeah I know what you mean. That's why I ask in the OP to give the stats by exercising the RNG engine on 1B numbers so that we can see the (lack of?) skew. But yeah obviously, unless they always drew a floating point number between 0 and 1, then multiplied it and still stored the original number, I don't see how they can show us.
But asking is free, and they may comply exercising their RNG engine against a fixed range for 1B+ numbers and show us the result. We'll see.