Fan Favourite Store arrived

1235

Comments

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,140 Chairperson of the Boards
    320 pulls aren't *required* because the 15% chance is random.  I'm guessing that 320 is a recommendation based on someone working out the odds.  One player might do it in 320 pulls, another in 201, another in 180, or 150.  Another player might pull 50 straight 5*. 

    It's random.
  • LavaManLee
    LavaManLee Posts: 1,742 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bad said:
    entrailbucket said:

    As humans, we are terrible at randomness and probability (this is why casinos can make money), so without objective tracking, subjective impressions are just not useful.

    It's 15%.  That's it.
    Subjective? I didn't stopped on giving reasons. 
    There is no rating manipulation: the game gives what it says.
    However players didn't got it.
    Another fact(all of you are free to believe it or not): I've often read that it is required 320 pulls for to champ all 3 LLs. It is a good assumption based on stadistics. 
    However in 2 occasions I champed all 3 with 180 pulls.
    That cannot be explained with a 15% rate except being hyper lucky.
    However it refutes my theory on the algorithm and it explains the ~1-:7.
    Think about it ;)
    Bad, it does not refute your theory at all.  It absolutely can be explained with a 15% rate.  I am getting you do not work with statistics for a living and, if so, I don't know any other way to convince you.  Every pull is a 1:7 chance.  Every pull.  Doesn't matter if it's done ahead of time or at the time, but it is a 1:7 pull.

    In theory, every single pull you make for the rest of your life COULD be a 5*.  Or, every single pull you make for the rest of your life COULD be a 4*.  It is completely random and completely 1:7.

    Put it this way.  Roll a die.  In theory, if you had infinite rolls, you could roll a 6 for infinite times.  But you probably won't.  But you could.  This is the same.

    Your logic above absolutely CAN be explained.
  • Bad
    Bad Posts: 3,146 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited October 2021
    2 times? No. One time could be but 2 times not.
    With a 15% you can champ all 3 or not because as you say you can pull 4*s until you die.
    However : A/to champ all 3 LL 2 times and saving 100 pulls before the goal if it was a 15%
    B/ to champ regularly almost all the characters and some of them with many covers beyond lev 450 before they exit LL
    That is not stadistics you can say what you want.
    LavaManLee said:
    Bad, it does not refute your theory at all.  It absolutely can be explained with a 15% rate.  I am getting you do not work with statistics for a living and, if so, I don't know any other way to convince you.  Every pull is a 1:7 chance.  Every pull.  Doesn't matter if it's done ahead of time or at the time, but it is a 1:7 pull.



    Your logic above absolutely CAN be explained.
    If you know so much about stadistics you could calculate the probability of champing 3 characters, more than 40 5* covers on a 15% rate, in 200 pulls, and do it 2 times.
    Hint: it's not a 15%.
  • MadScientist
    MadScientist Posts: 317 Mover and Shaker
    The probability to get 40 or more 5-Star covers from 200 LTs at a 15% rate is 3.355%. 

    Note: you just have to sum a binomial distribution. In Excel just do 1-BINOM.DIST(39,200,15%,true)
  • LavaManLee
    LavaManLee Posts: 1,742 Chairperson of the Boards
    MadScientist said:
    The probability to get 40 or more 5-Star covers from 200 LTs at a 15% rate is 3.355%. 

    Note: you just have to sum a binomial distribution. In Excel just do 1-BINOM.DIST(39,200,15%,true)
    Exactly.  Is it possible?  Yep.  Is it probable?  Nope.
  • LavaManLee
    LavaManLee Posts: 1,742 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bad said:
    If you know so much about stadistics you could calculate the probability of champing 3 characters, more than 40 5* covers on a 15% rate, in 200 pulls, and do it 2 times.
    Hint: it's not a 15%.
    As stated in the post by MadScientist, it is 3.355%.  Not sure what your point is, though.
  • Bad
    Bad Posts: 3,146 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited October 2021
    Wow. I must buy a colection of lotto tickets, because that probability is easier than to win a lot of types of lotto.
    And I must be the only player experiencing this because the things that I'm saying seem to not ring any bell in no other players. 
    Perhaps I must contact support because it seems something happens with my account and my 5* rate, too.
    Unfortunately that it's the only experience I have playing this game day to day from almost 4 years so I cannot be convinced from my personal experiencie.
    Perhaps I should try to hoard another 200 pulls and champ another 3 LLs. That way surely I would decrease that rating from 3.355% to perhaps a 1.xxxx.
  • LavaManLee
    LavaManLee Posts: 1,742 Chairperson of the Boards
    Honestly, I don't know what is so difficult to understand.  You did something that is possible but improbable.  Happens all the time  Every winner of the lottery.  There is nothing you did that is out of the bounds of possibility.  But you continue to act as if it can't happen.
  • Sekilicious
    Sekilicious Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited October 2021
    LavaManLee said:
    Bad said:
    If you know so much about stadistics you could calculate the probability of champing 3 characters, more than 40 5* covers on a 15% rate, in 200 pulls, and do it 2 times.
    Hint: it's not a 15%.
    As stated in the post by MadScientist, it is 3.355%.  Not sure what your point is, though.
    Because I cannot stop from adding my understanding, 3% means that if 100 people do something or you do it 100 times (in this case try to pull 40 5* covers in less than 200 pulls at a 15% rate) you should expect that, on average, 3 of the 100 to succeed and 97 to fail. To put it another way, if the lottery odds are 1 in 17 million then, again on average, you should only expect someone to win if 17 million people play or you played 17 million times. Frankly, pulling 40 at less than 200 twice isn’t even that big of a deal considering the number of people that play. It happens all the time, just as the opposite (whatever the equivalent of not pulling 40 in 320 is) does.  Just like the lottery (I do not expect myself to win, but I expect someone to). The only time you should ever expect something not to ever happen is if there is a 0% chance. It is difficult to intuitively understand this because experience generally works with very small samples. 
  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,140 Chairperson of the Boards
    dianetics said:
    entrailbucket said:
    It's a 15% chance of a 5* for each pull. 

    This stuff about a "guaranteed" rate doesn't make any sense.  No one has explained what the difference is between that and a purely random chance.
    I said this before, but there is no difference if you don't know your seed.
    If there was a way to find your specific seed then you could potentially figure out which variable affects where you fall in the algorithm, and then exploit that.
    It is a perception of randomness, but it is the result of a mathematical equation.
    Obviously, it is on the dev's to balance the algorithm in a manner where the 1:7 stands over rational number of pulls...say 100-200.
    I don't know who would rely on the guaranteed idea since it is chance based. The only guarantee is a 4* or better.
    I meant to address this the other day and forgot. 

    It is highly, highly unlikely that they're using a seeded pseudorandom algorithm to determine these pulls.  That kind of random number generator fell out of fashion decades ago (I remember the rand() function on my graphing calculator was quite predictable!).

    These days, random number generators have gotten much better, to the point that even the worst ones are basically indistinguishable from true randomness.  The most basic pseudorandom algorithms currently in use are essentially "seeded" with something like electronic noise generated by some hardware component in the server. 

    The more advanced ones use a natural, randomly occurring phenomenon, like cosmic background radiation or radioactive decay.  These algorithms are actually truly random by the mathematical definition, and they're accessible to everyone now, via the magic of the internet!

    Unless they've somehow chosen to use an algorithm from the 60s or 70s, there is no practical way to reverse-engineer it.
  • shardwick
    shardwick Posts: 2,121 Chairperson of the Boards
    Well, I went 0 for 16. Lame. It sucks because I really could have used a Strange cover too. Oh well.
  • TheEyeDoctorsWife
    TheEyeDoctorsWife Posts: 832 Critical Contributor
    shardwick said:
    Well, I went 0 for 16. Lame. It sucks because I really could have used a Strange cover too. Oh well.
    That’s disappointing, especially since I’ve read we’re “guaranteed “ 15%.
  • hothie
    hothie Posts: 210 Tile Toppler
    edited October 2021
    I just wanted to make a quick point that many of you know, but some do not:

    the odds given in the store as 1:7 actually means 1 success to 7 failures, so there are actually 8 total attempts to get this ratio. 1/8 is a 12.5% success rate. It does NOT mean 1 success in 7 attempts, which is 14.29% Just wanted to make that clarification, as I misunderstood it for a while as well.

    That being said, I managed to get 1 cover for each of the 3 5*s in the store with around 25ish attempts (It's my fault that I didn't keep track of how many pulls I did over the span of the store.) So I think I stayed pretty close to that 12.5% success rate. But being a 4* player, I also liked many of the 4*s I did get, so i usually didn't mind when I did pull a 4*, as some of them were champ rewards.
  • shardwick
    shardwick Posts: 2,121 Chairperson of the Boards
    TheEyeDoctorsWife said:
    shardwick said:
    Well, I went 0 for 16. Lame. It sucks because I really could have used a Strange cover too. Oh well.
    That’s disappointing, especially since I’ve read we’re “guaranteed “ 15%.
    If only. Stuff like this is why I wish there was a way to at least get extra 4* and 5* bonus shards if let's say you go 10 pulls without getting a 5*.
  • Theghouse
    Theghouse Posts: 363 Mover and Shaker
    hothie said:
    I just wanted to make a quick point that many of you know, but some do not:

    the odds given in the store as 1:7 actually means 1 success to 7 failures, so there are actually 8 total attempts to get this ratio. 1/8 is a 12.5% success rate. It does NOT mean 1 success in 7 attempts, which is 14.29% Just wanted to make that clarification, as I misunderstood it for a while as well.

    That being said, I managed to get 1 cover for each of the 3 5*s in the store with around 25ish attempts (It's my fault that I didn't keep track of how many pulls I did over the span of the store.) So I think I stayed pretty close to that 12.5% success rate. But being a 4* player, I also liked many of the 4*s I did get, so i usually didn't mind when I did pull a 4*, as some of them were champ rewards.
    At some point a few years ago they shifted away from posting the odds as exact percentages to the "rounded" figures of 1:7, 1:4, etc.  There are multiple sources of confirmation since that change, both "official" and "unofficial", that the 5* odds for legendary tokens are still 5% each for the 3 featured 5*, for a 15% total odds that any single pull will be a 5*.
  • hothie
    hothie Posts: 210 Tile Toppler
    Theghouse said:
    hothie said:
    I just wanted to make a quick point that many of you know, but some do not:

    the odds given in the store as 1:7 actually means 1 success to 7 failures, so there are actually 8 total attempts to get this ratio. 1/8 is a 12.5% success rate. It does NOT mean 1 success in 7 attempts, which is 14.29% Just wanted to make that clarification, as I misunderstood it for a while as well.

    That being said, I managed to get 1 cover for each of the 3 5*s in the store with around 25ish attempts (It's my fault that I didn't keep track of how many pulls I did over the span of the store.) So I think I stayed pretty close to that 12.5% success rate. But being a 4* player, I also liked many of the 4*s I did get, so i usually didn't mind when I did pull a 4*, as some of them were champ rewards.
    At some point a few years ago they shifted away from posting the odds as exact percentages to the "rounded" figures of 1:7, 1:4, etc.  There are multiple sources of confirmation since that change, both "official" and "unofficial", that the 5* odds for legendary tokens are still 5% each for the 3 featured 5*, for a 15% total odds that any single pull will be a 5*.
    Ok, thanks. I wasn't around then, so was just going by the standard nomenclature that odds are given in and what it means. 
  • Theghouse
    Theghouse Posts: 363 Mover and Shaker
    This store was an absolute victory for me.  I got 9 FF tokens out of the anniversary vault, and spent another 4350 CP on 183 total pulls.

    16 Apoc (plus more from shards, up to 480)
    15 Kitty (from 6 covers to champed at 458)
    9 Strange (from 10 covers to champed at 456)

    40 total 5* out of 183 pulls for a whopping 21.9%.  I also got my first set of 5* bonus shards, only the 50 but better than nothing!

    Since I started tracking for the last 6 months my overall 5* rate in all combined stores is 79 of 425 for 18.6%.
  • FairyBlades52
    FairyBlades52 Posts: 50 Match Maker
    I was disappointed, 50 pulls and one strange, one kitty. I am now 1 cover away from champing Strange, but what a disappointing percentage. 
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    Total 10 pulls which gives me 2 Dr Strange covers, which turned to be saved covers.  :s
  • Bad
    Bad Posts: 3,146 Chairperson of the Boards
    Theghouse said:

    Since I started tracking for the last 6 months my overall 5* rate in all combined stores is 79 of 425 for 18.6%.
    Wow! That is really close to the things I was saying. Or perhaps you will be another 3.355% player lol.

Categories