RNG Fairness

[Livilda]

Yes I am fine with it I have no issues saying it they got their win off a faulty system at the end of day. We all sign up for a rng lottery to excepting it to be fair and at the end of day it was not.

[SilverSp]

theyre not gonna do anything about anything just say "oh well too bad so sad"

[Seera1024]

Yes I am fine with it I have no issues saying it they got their win off a faulty system at the end of day. We all sign up for a rng lottery to excepting it to be fair and at the end of day it was not.

And you're the one who is complaining about people in this community not sticking up for each other?!

This right here is not sticking up for people.

You'd be just fine with people losing their houses if something glitched out in their solution to the problem. That's real supportive.

Especially now that it's come out that the results were accurate and the cases where it stated 0 was due to a communication error - but the system wasn't designed to accept a non-answer as an answer and so it had to come up with something. And SE rightfully designed that something as 0 so that no one would win in error in a case where the servers failed to communicate.

[Livilda]

theyre not gonna do anything about anything just say "oh well too bad so sad"

Please read:
https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes...7fcff58ee4f9c5
They are already working on it. They have the correct lottery results, those results just weren't transmitted to the housing server.
Those results will be properly restored so that everyone who won a house will get their house.

[Havenchild]

Yes I am fine with it I have no issues saying it they got their win off a faulty system at the end of day. We all sign up for a rng lottery to excepting it to be fair and at the end of day it was not.

But literally no one got a win off of a faulty system. Not even the people who successfully purchased their plots in the lottery system.

[Avenger]

The diagram Livilda posted seems to be the best match for what Yoshi-P said in Update #3, specifically that the lottery results were calculated properly but some results were not properly communicated to the housing server, resulting in the "0" (mis)behavior.

The comments about probability don't seem to match Yoshi-P's explanation. However, they are mathematically correct for the scenario that OP was postulating: adding 0 into a lottery with 4 players would simply reduce everyone's winning chance from 25% to 20%, adding a 20% chance that everyone loses.

And everyone (like OP) should learn to program in Python (or any other easy-to-learn programming language) because it's fun! You could easily write your own lottery program and run it repeatedly to see what the results would be for different numbers of bidders with or without 0 added into the mix.

[S0lara]

hey guess what you're wrong

Hey genius, that's why I said if. Can you not read? Why don't you read my post before you try to be an forum troll.

[S0lara]

Lol, no. This would be a colossal dumpster fire that would make a lot of people quit the game.

Well, no, if what I had stated had been true, rolling back would have been fair, but I did use the subordinating conjunction "if"...and I never said that what I stated was absolute. I actually agree with you now though, because SE waited too long to address the issue, and it would have most definitely been a total dumpster fire.

[S0lara]

The diagram Livilda posted seems to be the best match for what Yoshi-P said in Update #3, specifically that the lottery results were calculated properly but some results were not properly communicated to the housing server, resulting in the "0" (mis)behavior.

After reading the explanation, and the funny infographic Livilda posted, it all makes sense, and it is good to know that a 0 was not added. So, congrats to those who won fair and square!

Also, Avenger you rock for promoting coding! Yes, everyone should learn how to code!

[DragonFlyy]

I originally replied with this in a lot of other posts, but I think it needs to seriously be looked at, so that everyone is on equal footing.

A lot of people made great points in the plethora of post about today's current housing RNG debacle, but regardless of what they did, the RNG code is created by a person, and they inputted 0 as one of the possible choices for output. I have coded in Python and Mathematica before, and if you import random, and then you list the parameters, e.g. list=1,2,3,4,5... It is pretty easy to see, that when they listed their parameters for the housing lottery system, they included 0 (zero) in the list of possible choices that could be rolled. If they did in fact did put zero into their list, as in: listhousing or list1 (whatever you want to call it) = 0,1,2,3,4,5..., when as stated earlier, it should have been list1=1,2,3,4,5...

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. I know it sucks for some people, but in all fairness, if zero (0) was included, then redoing it is the most fair solution.

The issue is more likely that when they created the randomization, somewhere their function returned null. Since an integer can't be null, it becomes 0.