I understand odds and statistics just fine, but thanks playing. I even understand the illogical nature of the let's make a deal conundrum. However, i also understand regression to mean, and that, if the odds are as described, even if it's a coin flip, the chances of flipping the same side four times in a row is very low... and gets lower with each flip. Odds of flipping heads or tails always even, odds of flipping same side x times in a row? Not at all even... increasingly unlikely in fact.
If you understood statistics correctly, you would know that regression to the mean does not apply to random rolls. It doesn't even apply to non-random rolls. Regression to the mean applies when there is an anchor for distribution. They do not apply to random walks.
That's true, but again, that's not how averages work in general. The chance of an event happening to a particular person is isolated... for example, I should just as easily be the guy who gets a good pull as I am the bad one, which means that my "odds" are unique to me. This is a math thing, it isn't really questionable.
This is also mathematically false. That is not consistent with "odds" as mathematics defines statistical odds.
Fifth, I'm sorry man, but manipulated drop rates are not a conspiracy theory. If you don't believe me just do an analysis with your own alliance. Ask everyone how much they spend per month or quarter and then look at drop rates. You'll see clustering that simply cannot be accounted for by chance. Is it huge? No, but it's enough to matter when each t4cc and featured hero is so critical. Case in point, the head of our alliance, who spends a lot, regularly has incredible pulls, including three nebulas across two accounts (both big spend accounts) in three tries. 3 nebulas in 3 tries bro. The folks who don't spend haven't pulled one.
My own analysis shows no such correlation to date. But the reason I don't specifically flaunt that analysis is that statistically speaking, it would take hundreds or thousands of people to generate a statistically significant result. Anyone who says they found a statistically significant correlation in a single alliance would be showing questionable methodology.
Incidentally, I wish I could take that bet at 5 to 1 odds, but there's no reasonable way to declare an unambiguous winner. If such a method was available, I would take that bet at reverse 1 to 5 odds.
I know this problem OP had is the same one I had with greater faction crystals during the civil war event. The whole experience those crystals should have been enough to shame Kabam into releasing the drop rates so that their customers could make an informed decision when these types of events happen.
Instead Kabam has shown that they don't care if a player gets the shaft on these deals. Otherwise they would have defined rewards instead of "a chance" at the rewards or published the rates of said chances.
There's a reason why countries like Japan and China are requiring these rates to be published. It prevents unscrupulous companies like Kabam from preying on unsuspecting players. I know the official line from Kabam is that they adhere to all laws and regulations they have to, but it doesn't make it right.
The best thing we can do is spread awareness of how Kabam does things so other players don't fall into the same trap of putting in effort and having nothing to show for it.
Condolences. It truly stinks to get awful crystal results, no matter what the cause.
I will also say thanks--thanks because I actually considered burning some of my scrap for ascendants against my better judgment. I know that doesn't make you feel better, but your experience made me pull back.
I can tell you that spending has NOTHING to do with crystal spins. I have spent high 4 figures, maybe low 5 figures, and I get nothing but **** from every crystal.
Confirmation bias is what you and your alliance mates have.
These are the greater ascendant crystals and don't have ISO in them. The regular ascendant crystals have lots of ISO in then. But the ones you can buy for 50k scrap are GACs.
Just to amplify: there are three different Ascendant crystals: the lesser ascendant crystal which we used to get from AQ and I think they award from a few other random places, the "Ascendant Crystal" without qualifier which is awarded primarily from the arena event as the 1.5 million milestone, and the Greater Ascendant Crystal which is sometimes sold in unit offers and is specifically the crystal you can obtain from Rockets Workshop. The Ascendant Crystal contains ISO with a rare chance for an alpha cat or t4b I think. The Greater Ascendant Crystal contains nothing but t4b and t4cc fragments (one or the other) with a rare chance to contain a fully formed t4b or t4cc instead.
These are the greater ascendant crystals and don't have ISO in them. The regular ascendant crystals have lots of ISO in then. But the ones you can buy for 50k scrap are GACs.
Your crystal odds have nothing to do with your spending... An alliance mate of mine has never spent a cent and he has 5* cable, dorm(duped), mordo and most recently hood (somewhere ard 50% odds for him thus far)... Another mate spends alot and has only angela as featured (opened >10 featured before that)... I personally have never spent and has a voodoo with 2 crystals opened...
Comments
If you understood statistics correctly, you would know that regression to the mean does not apply to random rolls. It doesn't even apply to non-random rolls. Regression to the mean applies when there is an anchor for distribution. They do not apply to random walks.
This is also mathematically false. That is not consistent with "odds" as mathematics defines statistical odds.
My own analysis shows no such correlation to date. But the reason I don't specifically flaunt that analysis is that statistically speaking, it would take hundreds or thousands of people to generate a statistically significant result. Anyone who says they found a statistically significant correlation in a single alliance would be showing questionable methodology.
Incidentally, I wish I could take that bet at 5 to 1 odds, but there's no reasonable way to declare an unambiguous winner. If such a method was available, I would take that bet at reverse 1 to 5 odds.
2nd, 24 t4b
3rd, 18k t4b
Instead Kabam has shown that they don't care if a player gets the shaft on these deals. Otherwise they would have defined rewards instead of "a chance" at the rewards or published the rates of said chances.
There's a reason why countries like Japan and China are requiring these rates to be published. It prevents unscrupulous companies like Kabam from preying on unsuspecting players. I know the official line from Kabam is that they adhere to all laws and regulations they have to, but it doesn't make it right.
The best thing we can do is spread awareness of how Kabam does things so other players don't fall into the same trap of putting in effort and having nothing to show for it.
I will also say thanks--thanks because I actually considered burning some of my scrap for ascendants against my better judgment. I know that doesn't make you feel better, but your experience made me pull back.
Dr. Zola
Confirmation bias is what you and your alliance mates have.
Cool thanks
Was fourth time buying first three was full t4b which was nice but disappointing