RNG Fairness

[Nihility]

Yeah, no. People who won the lottery on unaffected plots should NOT be rolled back. I'm sorry it sucks for everyone involved, but rolling back people who have already RELOCATED TO ANOTHER PLOT? You're just asking for a much bigger poop storm.

Some who have upgraded from a small to medium, or a medium to a large, or a small to a large:
- How would they be able to go back if their furnishings/storeroom are way over the 400 limit?
- Where would the extra furnishings go?
- How would the player able to get back to their original plot, if the system can't pinpoint where these players were originally?
- Would these players get extra compensation, because of the system being "bugged"?
- Why should players, who entered like everyone else, waited like everyone else, had the same field as everyone else, have to give up something they won? I want a good reason for this.

None of us knew the system was bugged. Everyone who entered the lottery was on the same playing field. People who got their new plots should not be punished, because SE screwed up with something in the coding. The team messed up, yes I get it. However, these players should not be forced to reroll again, due to a lot of other factors that could make the situation much, much worse. If they can find which lottery number won for each bugged plot, it would be better imo.

and all the people that got zero'd just get a tough luck suckers, system is only fair for the winners

[Evergrey]

Yeah, no. People who won the lottery on unaffected plots should NOT be rolled back. I'm sorry it sucks for everyone involved, but rolling back people who have already RELOCATED TO ANOTHER PLOT? You're just asking for a much bigger poop storm.

Some who have upgraded from a small to medium, or a medium to a large, or a small to a large:
- How would they be able to go back if their furnishings/storeroom are way over the 400 limit?
- Where would the extra furnishings go?
- How would the player able to get back to their original plot, if the system can't pinpoint where these players were originally?
- Would these players get extra compensation, because of the system being "bugged"?
- Why should players, who entered like everyone else, waited like everyone else, had the same field as everyone else, have to give up something they won? I want a good reason for this.

None of us knew the system was bugged. Everyone who entered the lottery was on the same playing field. People who got their new plots should not be punished, because SE screwed up with something in the coding. The team messed up, yes I get it. However, these players should not be forced to reroll again, due to a lot of other factors that could make the situation much, much worse. If they can find which lottery number won for each bugged plot, it would be better imo.

What if, let's say a TV competition, and the winner gets a huge amount of price money.
Later it's found out that there was an error in the voting system.
Would the winner still be allowed to keep the price money, or would they do a re-vote?

[Seera1024]

What if, let's say a TV competition, and the winner gets a huge amount of price money.
Later it's found out that there was an error in the voting system.
Would the winner still be allowed to keep the price money, or would they do a re-vote?

There's a different set of problems with that though.

Your scenario doesn't have people who transferred their lot to a new plot to factor into whatever solution they come up with.

Your analogy is flawed.

If they can't rollback JUST the housing districts to a point after the bidding closed and before the winner drawn, then there is no perfect solution. Those who won a lot should keep them, the sole bidders should be given their plots, and the bidding reopened once they've fixed the bug.

[Evergrey]

There's a different set of problems with that though.

Your scenario doesn't have people who transferred their lot to a new plot to factor into whatever solution they come up with.

Your analogy is flawed.

If they can't rollback JUST the housing districts to a point after the bidding closed and before the winner drawn, then there is no perfect solution. Those who won a lot should keep them, the sole bidders should be given their plots, and the bidding reopened once they've fixed the bug.

roll back all housing wards to the point before then.
Then it would be as if nothing had happened and things were as they were before this problem happened.

Easier said than done perhaps, I know.

[VarHyid]

What if, let's say a TV competition, and the winner gets a huge amount of price money.
Later it's found out that there was an error in the voting system.
Would the winner still be allowed to keep the price money, or would they do a re-vote?

Depends on the error. If it did not lower any one person’s odds any more than any other participants, but only introduced the possibility that the drawing could fail, then if it didn’t fail, the results are fair and odds equal.

[Breezelyn]

and all the people that got zero'd just get a tough luck suckers, system is only fair for the winners

Is it to fair to people, who never had a house before and won their plot, to say "HA! Sucks for you, you're losing it now." Yeah, that's gonna end REAL great.

What if, let's say a TV competition, and the winner gets a huge amount of price money.
Later it's found out that there was an error in the voting system.
Would the winner still be allowed to keep the price money, or would they do a re-vote?

The winner should still keep the money? It's not their fault the system was flawed. Things need to be checked before they go official. However, the winner shouldn't be stripped of their winnings because things weren't double, TRIPLE checked before it went live.

Easy fix: Hold another contest and choose a few more winners. /s

----------------------------

Anyway, this whole situation is sore for everyone involved. Myself included. Am I angry? Yes. Am I upset? Yes. People who won their plots shouldn't have it taken away, because they played the lottery like everyone else. The blame should be on SE for not triple-checking to be sure everything was up to date. Don't punish the players because of a system failure. This is all I will say on the matter. Arguing over nonsense will get us nowhere. Let us wait to see what the team does and decides to do on this matter.

[VarHyid]

If what I stated is correct, then in all fairness, they should roll back EVERYONE's bids, because if 0 (zero) was counted as a possible RNG choice, then EVERY roll is invalidated and needs to be done again.

If the zero was only added and the count was not shifted by 1 because of it, then there’s absolutely no need to re-roll and the result is fair because the odds were equally lowered for everyone.

For example, if 4 people entered the lottery, each would have had a 25% chance to win, but if they dropped a 5th “zero bidder” into the mix, all it means that now all 4 real people simply had a 20% chance of winning… and there was a 20% chance that the drawing fails and hits the zero. If it didn’t, though then how exactly is it unfair?

Only those cases where zero actually won need to be re-rolled (and the single bidders should just get the house, of course).

[Evergrey]

If the zero was only added and the count was not shifted by 1 because of it, then there’s absolutely no need to re-roll and the result is fair because the odds were equally lowered for everyone.

For example, if 4 people entered the lottery, each would have had a 25% chance to win, but if they dropped a 5th “zero bidder” into the mix, all it means that now all 4 real people simply had a 20% chance of winning… and there was a 20% chance that the drawing fails and hits the zero. If it didn’t, though then how exactly is it unfair?

Only those cases where zero actually won need to be re-rolled (and the single bidders should just get the house, of course).

Because like you said, instead of a 1/4 of winning it turned out to be a 1/5.
The 0 just acted as a ghost-vote with no person behind it.
If the winning roll was, let's say a 23 (on a roll of 1-100), then person nr.1 would've won on a 1/4 with a 25% win rate. But thanks for the "ghost" that means the 2nd person won due to nr1 got shifted lower.
Meaning the results were altered due to the ghost, ending in that all results were tainted.

[VarHyid]

Because like you said, instead of a 1/4 of winning it turned out to be a 1/5.
The 0 just acted as a ghost-vote with no person behind it.
If the winning roll was, let's say a 23 (on a roll of 1-100), then person nr.1 would've won on a 1/4 with a 25% win rate. But thanks for the "ghost" that means the 2nd person won due to nr1 got shifted lower.
Meaning the results were altered due to the ghost, ending in that all results were tainted.

You can’t assume that if only there was no zero in the mix, the roll would have hit exactly one number higher. It’s much simpler, there were 4 win states and one lose state. All 4 win states had equal chances. If the lose state would have hit, the we just re-roll. There is no taint here… or let me put it this way - the taint was the possibility that the results may hit the fail state.

[Evergrey]

You can’t assume that if only there was no zero in the mix, the roll would have hit exactly one number higher. It’s much simpler, there were 4 win states and one lose state. All 4 win states had equal chances. If the lose state would have hit, the we just re-roll. There is no taint here… or let me put it this way - the taint was the possibility that the results may hit the fail state.

Mm.. I think I understand now.
Just my head having a little trouble binding dots together today.
Lack of sleep and long day out.
But yeah, if there was a re-drawing without the 0 then yes, it would become a "normal" rng.
My bad.