Displaying % chance of drop/reward

Example: You get a lucky sphere with a long list of possible rewards. One of them are drakens of course. Nobody wants drakens in their lucky spheres. Oddly enough the spheres usually drop drakens!

In China, as far as I know, there is a regulation that companies do have to display the odds to get loot from loot boxes and such in their video games. No matter the country or political bull-you-know-what, this is a fair thing as it respects the player / customer and it doesn't mess with him, provided that the % chance is of course true which I assume, it is.

It's obvious no company wants to do this out of their good free will as it may sort of harm the gambling character of their game/s, which is widely believed to be very profitable, right?

So anyway, in order to know if it pays off to play another monster hunt event or so, the description of a lucky sphere could be:

Lucky Sphere of Costume A

You have a chance to get one of these items:
- draken 90.00%
- costume A 7.00%
- costume B 1.00%
- costume C 1.00%
- costume D 1.00%
​

The values are not what I'd like to see, but they pretty much reflect the reality as it is now, imo.

This may apply to other things too, like a % drop chance of unique items in the description at the PW Q's entrances and such.

I don't quite care if this thing makes random drops / loots more profitable for the devs or for the players. It might as well result in removing them altogether. I only care about fairness.
I think the chance this will never be deliberately implemented is 99% or higher. Governments would have to intervene.
But perhaps BP might consider that being honest with their players / customers would be much more appreciated than trying to trick us all the time. I don't know anyone in the game who is happy with the loot they receive from things like lucky spheres.

The trickery is already obvious, as the most probable reward from lucky spheres (drakens) is always displayed as last in the list.

 

That new rule took effect 1 March but not all companies have complied yet. There is some confusion as to weather it affects loot boxes bought only with real cash or also including ones bought with virtual currency. Also it does not cover loot boxes gained as rewards.

Oddly enough the rule has created real deception and trickery. Some publishers have increased the drop chance for the Chinese version of their games while lowering them in other versions.

The other thing that is happening is that some Chinese dev shoppes are not longer publishing in China. You can still play them in China but technically they are not a Chinese version... and hence no odds disclosure.

Classic case of regulation making a bigger mess.

Luck be with ye,
Mikey,
Tegan

 

You are right. I heard companies found some holes in the regulations. One company disclosed the chances, but after two weeks closed it again given the hole.

At least we know what the drop chance of Sargon Torso was, zero)

 

I would like to know the chances to get mounts and such from spheres

 

I see. Well, all that you mentioned perfectly shows how important it is for game companies to keep these odds secret :/ Or else they wouldn't try to avoid any such regulations...

Also I must admit that knowing the odds still doesn't guarantee the desired drop to you, right? Like for instance if an item has a 10% drop chance, it doesn't mean that you get it from your 10th opened loot box...

The point is that players might stop being tricked so easily with these purposely vague lists of possible rewards.
Well, at least the rewards should be sorted from highest to lowest drop chance, just like ingredients on a chocolate bar package.

 

You can display whatever you want ... that doesn't mean your code will work according to probability theory. And you can't prove it.

 

If the devs hire a code monkey with a PhD in quantum state probability they might be able to come close

Luck be with ye,
Mikey,
Tegan

 

And why can't one prove such an easy thing?) Should be as easy as having a couple of automated tests to similuate the drop 10k times (invoke the method responsible) and assert the delta. There are many extremely simple models for that. Then you can gather real data and compare them with the simulation and designed numbers to know I'd it works or if there any other moving pieces. Is piece of cake.

 

Really? We all think things are so easy ... but in fact they are not ... and most of the things we think are easy are in fact impossible.
In example ... with the latest discoveries scientists have proven that physics and the very core of what we were told it is the foundation of the modern science is wrong. All school textbooks in fact should be rewritten from scratch ... and all those academic titles and stuff would be nullified.
What you call it to be a "piece of cake" is just a theory ... it is not a proof ... especially not in court of law.

 

What would be the point of stating odds other than to create more frustration for the players who buck those odds?

A coin flip is 50-50, yet those odds will not change the fact that you can flip a coin 100 times and it lands on heads every time. Yes, if you flip a coin enough times the odds will come into play, but what is the definition of enough times?

Some of the more mathematically inclined individuals here on the forum posted odds of crafting, yet there are some players who get lucky right away and some who struggle for months without ever getting lucky.

The odds are the same for everyone, yet if you fall outside of those expected odds, you get frustrated, come onto the forums to complain and in the end, nothing changes.

So why add more reasons to complain?

 

odds are no physics. they are extremely straightforward and easy to calculate.

There is no way you can land a coin on heads 100 times in a row. odds of that happening are lower than surviving 30000ft fall 20 times I a row, just to give you an idea.

this is actually very questionable, and this should be being tested constantly to make sure fair distribution of the random function. the randomized seed could be bound to time, location, God knows what else making it different for different users.

 

Wrong way. As you could not expect it, this is the faster way, for a shopper , to have large amount of drakens. Don't you ?

 

How many times you had to die while testing the odds.
What were you doing there man ... installing a personal satellite?
I have no time to respond to your claims ... but I will ... as soon as i can.

 

I'm just gonna take a stab at guessing quantum probability theory was not part of your required curriculum in school

Oh and some gee whiz info... the odds of a coin toss being 50/50 is actually only true if the coin's center of gravity is precisely in it's center off mass and it is tossed in a vacuum and it is tossed by a device that ensures it's upward acceleration is equal to the downward gravitational constant and likey some other variables I can't think of atm but my head is beginning to throb so I'm just gonna go grab another brewski

OH yeah, if you're a purist of chaos theory then there really is no such thing as random in a dynamic system... man this is really a good beer

Luck be with ye,
Mikey,
Tegan

//edit: added last sentence//

 

OK let me start ...

Quite big words ... for a human being as we know we humans are having pretty much limited mind.
Easy and straightforward to calculate ... maybe. But is it correct?
Let me give you a simple example of "easy and straightforward" calculation:
~~~ Empty bus calculation ~~~
We are having an empty bus which is driving on its own from bus station A to bus station G. Bus station A is a starting point and bus station G is a end point ... there are also bus stations B, C, D, E and F in between. The bus should start empty from the starting point ... let people get in and get out on its route ... and stop empty at the ending point.
- the bus starts empty from the station A
- 3 people get in; no one gets out - at station B
- 2 people get out; 3 people get in - at bus station C
- 3 people get out; 6 people get in - at bus station D
- 10 people get out; no one gets in - at bus station E
- no one gets out; 3 people get in - at bus station F
- The bus arrives empty at bus station G
Pretty simple and straightforward and also mathematically correct ... right?
But is that really possible in real life? No it is not.
I will give you another example where mathematics and logic are involved:
~~~ Painting a wall ~~~
One man can paint a wall in 4 days. Mathematically correct. Logically correct
2 man can paint it in 2 days. Mathematically correct. Logically correct
4 man can paint it in 1 day. Mathematically correct. Logically still correct
8 man can paint it in half a day. Mathematically correct. Logically also correct
16 man can paint it in 1/4 th a day. Mathematically correct. Logically may be correct
....
....
....
128 man can paint it in 45mins. Mathematically correct. Logically almost wrong
256 man can paint it in 22.3 mins. Mathematically correct. Logically wrong
512 man can paint it in 11 min. Mathematically correct. Logically impossible
1024 man can paint it in 6 min. Mathematically correct. Logically impossible

"Ah ... math is awesome ... we love math" (good for you ... I don't like mathematics I love women ) but let us see what mathematics really is.
Mathematics is just a tool for analyzing and understanding the real world problems ... and a lot of it is not created by discovery but by design. It deals with idealized abstractions and pure concepts that exist only in human minds. It is a perfect eternal realm of absolute truth completely separated from physical reality. All theories, theorems and formulae have been derived from axioms. And what are those axioms? Axioms are just assumptions ... and these assumptions might be or might not be accurate in real life.

Spoiler: Joke

Physics professor has been doing an experiment, and has worked out an empirical equation that seems to explain his data. He asks the math professor to look at it.
A week later, the math professor says the equation is invalid. By then, the physics professor has used his equation to predict the results of further experiments, and he is getting excellent results, so he asks the math professor to look again.
Another week goes by, and they meet once more. The math professor tells the physics professor the equation does work, "But only in the trivial case where the numbers are real and positive."

Almost everything we are dealing with on our computers is not just mathematics but rather physics. Because computers are real they are not imaginary.
Let me show you first (before getting to the main question on this topic) that your example is vague and incorrect.

For a start ... when using measurements we are using metric system ... we are not using feet, elbows or nails
Like Mikey already said

In reality all modern day experiments and researches have shown that the odds are always something like 51/49 in favor to whatever side was up when the coin is thrown into the air.
But coins are not perfect ... they are usually having one side heavier than the other one. They are also getting dirt over the time and some of them are not even perfectly symmetric. But lets assume we are having a perfect coin. In this case we must not neglect the environment.
Toss a coin in Amsterdam and toss a coin on Mount Everest.
Or ... simply toss a coin in a water pool while diving.
Will you get same results? No you will not.

Spoiler: Joke #2

A farmer has problems with his chickens: all of the sudden, they are all getting very sick. After trying all conventional means, he calls a mathematician to see if they can figure out what is wrong. The mathematician tries. He stands there and looks at the chickens for a long time without touching them or anything. Then all of the sudden he starts scribbling away in a notebook. Finally, after several gruesome calculations, he exclaims, "I've got it! But it only works for spherical chickens in a vacuum."

So lets move to the next part ... that ~9Km fall.
You are speculating again and assuming things up.
You can't start an experiment with only your assumption. You have to measure things up and get valid data.
You are trying to simplify the things up ... while in reality they are so complex and almost impossible to predict or measure.
In order to get it right ... you have to measure and calculate:
- height, mass, weight, body structure, body shape, health condition ... etc etc etc
- weather conditions and air pressure, density, humidity, wind direction and strength ... etc etc etc
- you should check the perimeter if anything might obstruct your experiment in any way
- etc ... etc ...etc
Your experiment will end up differently every time you conduct it over and over again ... it will never be the same. So how can you calculate the odds to something you can't even get to work out or predict?
It can always end up in different scenarios ...
- the person might always die
- the person might not even land
- the person might only suffer broken bone
- the person might land unhurt ... what if there is a force ... like strong wind ... that can negate the gravity. You know something like the example with he bullet shot from a train in motion. Mythbusters actually proved this to be true with a football shot from truck.
- even if there is a force that can negate the other forces and the person taking the fall land like a feather ... unhurt ... there is always possibility the person still to be dead because of heart failure before even starting the fall
- etc etc etc
So you are comparing and calculate the odds of the first example with the coin and the second example with a person falling from ~9KM height ... both examples in which you can't measure and predict things up.

So you may say "in what way all this has any relation with the topic" and your claims that "everything is easy and straightforward".
Very easy (actually very complex ). Like i said it is all physics not mathematics. Computer is real device it is not existing only in our minds. So if it is a real life device ... you have to have realistic approach to the calculation.
How do we know that the code and the algorithm has been written in such way so it can represent the Theory of Probability (which of course is a theory not a proof) in best possible faultless way?
We can't.
But even if we know the code and it is perfect (no possibility of errors) ... we can't neglect the environment. One small example:
you see everything inside computer is working only if there is a electric current running through the separate parts. Every part is made from some material and they are almost always different with different properties. When a device is working it creates a heat ... and heat is their worst enemy. You can't negate the heat ... you can lower it down to certain point and control it but you can't negate it. Many components are temperature sensitive and can have different properties with different temperature.
The point here is ... like professor Michio Kaku says "systematic errors creep into very delicate calculations"

And that is only one example ... not to mention that different computers are having different architecture (we are not talking computer architecture here) therefore they will act in different ways for a same executed application and many other things that can lead to different outcomes. In fact we have already been talking on this topic on few occasions here in the forum ... some time ago.

I challenge you to run ^ couple of automated tests and simulate the drop 10K times ... but on 10K different machines
Let me know of the outcome.
I would predict every single machine would probably have a different drop ... but like i said predictions and assumptions without real data are wrong.


Chemistry is physics without thought.
Mathematics is physics without purpose.

 

Mathematics is not physics
Mathematics is a language used to represent reality through models and theories

Chemistry is just physics, study physical chemistry, is it really different from physics?

 

Are you interpreting a saying?
Because that is what it really is.

Spoiler: saying

 

This % chance from spheres is 0%. My friend buy spheres of harpies for 40k Ander and got 1 which they have. Next time buy for 20k Ander and got only drakens. This LUCKY SPHERES are lucky only if you pay much on game

 

As a general assumption: they have that name because they make the seller's fortune, and certainly not the buyer's one.

 

Please delete this thread. TY.