Why keep playing when "RNG" is the enemy?

Between deals, gifting events, daily events and AW I've pulled 10 5* crystals since December 6. My pulls in order: Nebula, Iron Patriot, Archangel, Rocket, Hulk, Karnak, King Groot, Yellow Jacket, Ultron and just today Black Panther (Civil War). 10 pulls, 10 different champs, 9 of them mostly useless (AA being the exception) and, get this, NOT ONE PULL OF A CHAMP RELEASED AFTER MAY 2017. What are the odds that in 10 pulls there wouldn't be a single champion released in the 18 months prior? Not even a bad one, not a single newer champ at all.

But, you know, RNG...
«13

Comments

  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    4aj2rdoz1tdo.jpeg
    bue2c0gmuobt.jpeg
    s12csc0nb7wx.jpeg
  • Just roll with the punches
  • Zuko_ILCZuko_ILC Posts: 736
    Because the game is enjoyable. You don't have to play the game its optional. Bad luck is frustrating though and I've wanted to quit at times because of it until I remind myself its just a game.
  • ButtehrsButtehrs Posts: 481
    Ultron is really good st fighting omega red. Was super glad to have one a few months ago. Hes also great for fighting opponents who can bleed. And dont forget 2 regens a fight.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 6,509
    DalBot wrote: »
    What are the odds that in 10 pulls there wouldn't be a single champion released in the 18 months prior?

    Do you actually care? It doesn't really sound like you do.
  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    DNA3000 wrote: »

    Do you actually care? It doesn't really sound like you do.

    Appreciate the insightful reply that clearly adds to the conversation.

    I'm curious if anyone knows what the actual algorithmic odds are of this happening or can show verifiable evidence that this isn't somehow a total fluke occurrence... or that the odds aren't stacked.
  • SidDDragonSidDDragon Posts: 522
    Ultron is a really good lane clearer in aq..double immunity and guaranteed regen is still very helpful
    Nebula can be a situationally useful champ when needed with her immunities and her recent buff might also come in handy..plus she can be a useful option against robots if u don't have the usual options
    Hulk too becomes good with his dupe...I use my 5* r3 in aq map 5 and I am happy with the amount of work he puts in
    And AA is well amazing even unduped..yea he doesn't have his AAR but his DOT damage against non immunes is godly

    Yes u didn't get good champs,yes it sucks...but this game is based on luck and this is how it's gonna be
  • ian5555ian5555 Posts: 14
    Just keep pulling more champs. I've got 64 5*s out of 91 5* crystals, most basic a few featured. I go with what odds will give me a new champ that can help the grind in arena. I've had pretty good luck and have 10/13 on Seatin's BGT list (missing Ghost, Blade and Aegon). I honestly think those aren't bad pulls there but alot of old champs does kinda suck.

    Now I'm saving for Blade as he's really the only champ I still kinda want that I don't have so hope the RNG remains good to me.

    On the flip I can't pull a 6* God Tier to save my life in 7 crystals. Decent ones but no game changers yet but I'll keep trying.
  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    V1PER1987 wrote: »
    Your odds are not the best. 33/108 which is ~31%. So I guess you basically have a 31% chance to pull a post May 2017 champ. And about 30% of your pulls are pretty good. AA, Nebula, and Ultron are very good. I used to hate Ultron too but then I got him as a 5* on my alt and he’s been pretty amazing. He’s a tank and both him and Nebula will be very helpful for Biohazard, Bleed, Caltrops, and Poison nodes not including Morningstar and Abom fights. The problem is people are so focused on the god tier champs they can’t even appreciate above average champs.

    I couldn't care less about Gods, I don't even get a Taskmaster or a Masacre or anyone of the ilk in 10 pulls. So if the odds are 31.8% per pull, then you would think in 10 pulls it would have hit at least once or twice for a modern era champ right? Not a Sentry or a Sentinel or a Sabretooth or...
  • Ch1efsterCh1efster Posts: 341
    Well, in my last 29 5* crystals, I have pulled Cyclops Red 4 times. Now that's some amazing luck with RNG.
  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    And the thing is I have pulled some really good champs in the past six months, but literally every one was from a paid crystal of some sort. Pulled 5* Domino from a Grandmaster Daily crystal, pulled 5* Darkhawk from the $200 Marvelous Crystal (then pulled him again from a Thing GMFC which I dropped some coin on), pulled Emma Frost from one of the AW Defense crystals they offered a week or two back for $30, pulled Korg 2x from his GMFCs and pulled Venom the Duck 2x from GMFCs

    So the theme here seems to be "spend money if you want any newer champs and get only old champs from the 5* basic crystals". Plenty of new champs have come in to the basic crystals from May 2017 on and yet I've pulled none of them from those crystals 🤷🏻‍♂️
  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    Ch1efster wrote: »
    Well, in my last 29 5* crystals, I have pulled Cyclops Red 4 times. Now that's some amazing luck with RNG.

    I know your pain. I've pulled him 5x and only threw a few sig stones on there to keep them from expiring in inventory. Up until recently I didn't have a single mutant worth putting sigs in to and have over 110 mutant sigs sitting in my inventory
    apytfij8n8sw.png

  • MMCskippyMMCskippy Posts: 245
    Just opened a 4* shard crystal and hit level 99 on......


    Spider Gwen!!!

    A champ I've never ever quested with... never took into AQ... never set as an AW defender... nada...

    At least now every time I pull her 4* again I'll get 550 5* shards. This may be the only way anyone ever hopes to pull a Gwen...
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 6,509
    DalBot wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »

    Do you actually care? It doesn't really sound like you do.

    Appreciate the insightful reply that clearly adds to the conversation.

    I'm curious if anyone knows what the actual algorithmic odds are of this happening or can show verifiable evidence that this isn't somehow a total fluke occurrence... or that the odds aren't stacked.

    The odds against something like this happening are about one in 60-ish, except that this is what's known as a post-hoc binning problem. First you pulled the champs, then you looked for the anomaly. Because you weren't looking for that specific anomaly before pulling, you can't state the actual odds against this happening in a statistically proper way, because you can only calculate what the odds would have been before the pull. After the pull you have to calculate the odds of something happening that would cause you to complain about it.

    That's not a direct stab at you although I suspect it almost certainly sounds like it to you. Rather, it is a known problem with looking for statistical anomalies after the data is collected that has even brought down peer-reviewed scientific articles. The odds are small that all the pulls would be for champs that came out prior to May 2017. But if all the pulls were for champs that came out prior to June 2017 instead, you'd probably still be pointing that out. Ditto if they all came out prior to August 2017. And if they all came out *after* May 2017 you'd also be pointing that out.

    The odds of you finding something that *seems* statistically weird is actually very high in ten pulls, because while by definition a statistical anomaly has a low probability of occurring, there are so many different possible anomalies that the odds of seeing one of them after the fact is actually much higher than you might otherwise calculate. The odds of a sequence of pulls "looking weird" is actually very high.

    This is also why casinos often post the last twenty or so spins of the roulette wheel on an electronic board. Because they know that when people look at twenty random spins, they will see a pattern to them and bet on it. It is almost impossible for there to not be some apparent pattern in the spin results, even when they are entirely random.
  • LeRoy_1LeRoy_1 Posts: 4
    I have been playing for like 3 years . I have 36 5* only 3 good. My suggestion is play for fun it's only a game
  • DarthPhalDarthPhal Posts: 752
    In the thread directly below this one as I reply is a guy asking if the crystal algorithm has changed because 3 of his last 4 five star pulls were god tier.

    Luck runs in streaks.
  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    DNA3000 wrote: »

    The odds against something like this happening are about one in 60-ish, except that this is what's known as a post-hoc binning problem. First you pulled the champs, then you looked for the anomaly. Because you weren't looking for that specific anomaly before pulling, you can't state the actual odds against this happening in a statistically proper way, because you can only calculate what the odds would have been before the pull. After the pull you have to calculate the odds of something happening that would cause you to complain about it.

    That's not a direct stab at you although I suspect it almost certainly sounds like it to you. Rather, it is a known problem with looking for statistical anomalies after the data is collected that has even brought down peer-reviewed scientific articles. The odds are small that all the pulls would be for champs that came out prior to May 2017. But if all the pulls were for champs that came out prior to June 2017 instead, you'd probably still be pointing that out. Ditto if they all came out prior to August 2017. And if they all came out *after* May 2017 you'd also be pointing that out.

    The odds of you finding something that *seems* statistically weird is actually very high in ten pulls, because while by definition a statistical anomaly has a low probability of occurring, there are so many different possible anomalies that the odds of seeing one of them after the fact is actually much higher than you might otherwise calculate. The odds of a sequence of pulls "looking weird" is actually very high.

    This is also why casinos often post the last twenty or so spins of the roulette wheel on an electronic board. Because they know that when people look at twenty random spins, they will see a pattern to them and bet on it. It is almost impossible for there to not be some apparent pattern in the spin results, even when they are entirely random.

    the thing about the Vegas comparison to this is there is no direct comparable in FTP vs PTP. By that I mean Vegas (with very few exceptions)doesn't have places where you can play for free and win money in any games. That's the difference here. In this game I've always done ok in the pay to play in that I've essentially spent good money to get good champs, however my ratio of pulling a good champ from a free crystal has always been MAYBE 10% of the time and clearly 0% of the time on pulling modern era champs. I mean, I have yet to pull a single champ from version 15.0 onwards from a shards crystal, every single one has been from a paid crystal. At some point you have to consider whether or not that's just borderline incalculably bad luck or something else altogether.
  • BigdogbobBigdogbob Posts: 57
    I think nebula is quite good. Especially when paired with proxima. More than a few times I have used her in aw. I charge her to 20 charges, build to l2 and then parry and land the l2. I have done well over 100k damage with that combo many times. And since basically no one (until recently) has been shock immune it just wipes out my opponent. All the way up to the boss. And I play in master to platinum 2 wars so these aren’t cake walks.
  • V1PER1987V1PER1987 Posts: 2,646
    DalBot wrote: »
    And the thing is I have pulled some really good champs in the past six months, but literally every one was from a paid crystal of some sort. Pulled 5* Domino from a Grandmaster Daily crystal, pulled 5* Darkhawk from the $200 Marvelous Crystal (then pulled him again from a Thing GMFC which I dropped some coin on), pulled Emma Frost from one of the AW Defense crystals they offered a week or two back for $30, pulled Korg 2x from his GMFCs and pulled Venom the Duck 2x from GMFCs

    So the theme here seems to be "spend money if you want any newer champs and get only old champs from the 5* basic crystals". Plenty of new champs have come in to the basic crystals from May 2017 on and yet I've pulled none of them from those crystals 🤷🏻‍♂️

    Yes well unfortunately my main account suffers from that very problem. Yes it has a few good champs, but only because I spent to get them. Literally every basic/featured shard crystal I opened was complete garbage. I stopped spending in August after getting Heimdall. After a few months of trashy pulls I decided to get some Cyber Monday 5* crystals. Got Red Cyclops, Spider Gwen, and OG Cap. That was the moment I said Kabam will never see another dime from me ever again and I lost most of my excitement for this game. RNG is too much of a **** in this game.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 6,509
    DarthPhal wrote: »
    In the thread directly below this one as I reply is a guy asking if the crystal algorithm has changed because 3 of his last 4 five star pulls were god tier.

    Luck runs in streaks.

    Also, people perceive and remember streaks more.

    A paradox of randomness is that in a perfectly random sequence of coin flips these two sequences have exactly the same chance to occur:

    H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T
    H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

    Thirty consecutive heads is just as likely to occur as a thirty sequence run of alternating heads and tails. They are both about one in a billion. The reason why human beings think the second one is far less likely is because only one sequence "looks like" all heads: the sequence of all heads. However, human beings tend to think the sequence "heads-tails" repeated fifteen times is basically the same as "tails-heads" repeated fifteen times, and this sequence:

    H T H T H T H T H T H T H T T T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T

    with just one head changed to a tail is "almost" the same. Meanwhile this sequence:

    H H H H H H H H H H H H H T H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

    is no longer a sequence of thirty heads in a row, and isn't even "almost" a sequence of thirty heads in a row; it is thirteen heads in a row followed by sixteen heads in a row with a tail in the middle.

    No one comes to the forums to report an alternating sequence of "good" and "bad" pulls, even though a perfectly alternating sequence would be just as randomly improbable as all good or all bad pulls. People only remember and report on what they think is significant, except that intuition is essentially worthless.
  • DrZolaDrZola Posts: 2,057
    edited January 24
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    DarthPhal wrote: »
    In the thread directly below this one as I reply is a guy asking if the crystal algorithm has changed because 3 of his last 4 five star pulls were god tier.

    Luck runs in streaks.

    Also, people perceive and remember streaks more.

    A paradox of randomness is that in a perfectly random sequence of coin flips these two sequences have exactly the same chance to occur:

    H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T
    H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

    Thirty consecutive heads is just as likely to occur as a thirty sequence run of alternating heads and tails. They are both about one in a billion. The reason why human beings think the second one is far less likely is because only one sequence "looks like" all heads: the sequence of all heads. However, human beings tend to think the sequence "heads-tails" repeated fifteen times is basically the same as "tails-heads" repeated fifteen times, and this sequence:

    H T H T H T H T H T H T H T T T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T

    with just one head changed to a tail is "almost" the same. Meanwhile this sequence:

    H H H H H H H H H H H H H T H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

    is no longer a sequence of thirty heads in a row, and isn't even "almost" a sequence of thirty heads in a row; it is thirteen heads in a row followed by sixteen heads in a row with a tail in the middle.

    No one comes to the forums to report an alternating sequence of "good" and "bad" pulls, even though a perfectly alternating sequence would be just as randomly improbable as all good or all bad pulls. People only remember and report on what they think is significant, except that intuition is essentially worthless.

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/roots-of-unity/has-anyone-ever-flipped-heads-76-times-in-a-row/

    Food for thought...and I think the issue isn’t that the odds of any two particular 30-flip sequences are equivalent, but that the odds of an all single outcome run are astronomically low. But that’s not the crystal result the OP takes issue with anyway...

    Dr. Zola
  • DalBotDalBot Posts: 409
    DrZola wrote: »
    [

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/roots-of-unity/has-anyone-ever-flipped-heads-76-times-in-a-row/

    Food for thought...and I think the issue isn’t that the odds of any two particular 30-flip sequences are equivalent, but that the odds of an all single outcome run are astronomically low. But that’s not the crystal result the OP takes issue with anyway...

    Dr. Zola

    Exactly. The issue isn't good champ/bad champ or even anything related to consistency probabilities, my issue is that I have pulled countless 5* crystals since 13.0 and not pulled any champ who has come out since that release. The only champs I've pulled that have been released post 13.0 have been champs I paid real money for. The odds would be astronomically slim that I wouldn't pull at least a few newer champs with all of the 5* crystals I've been able to pop. It's suspicious is all and makes you question the system when you see others who would reasonably have the same odds as you getting completely different rewards at a frequency that defies explanation.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 6,509
    DrZola wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    DarthPhal wrote: »
    In the thread directly below this one as I reply is a guy asking if the crystal algorithm has changed because 3 of his last 4 five star pulls were god tier.

    Luck runs in streaks.

    Also, people perceive and remember streaks more.

    A paradox of randomness is that in a perfectly random sequence of coin flips these two sequences have exactly the same chance to occur:

    H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T
    H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

    Thirty consecutive heads is just as likely to occur as a thirty sequence run of alternating heads and tails. They are both about one in a billion. The reason why human beings think the second one is far less likely is because only one sequence "looks like" all heads: the sequence of all heads. However, human beings tend to think the sequence "heads-tails" repeated fifteen times is basically the same as "tails-heads" repeated fifteen times, and this sequence:

    H T H T H T H T H T H T H T T T H T H T H T H T H T H T H T

    with just one head changed to a tail is "almost" the same. Meanwhile this sequence:

    H H H H H H H H H H H H H T H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

    is no longer a sequence of thirty heads in a row, and isn't even "almost" a sequence of thirty heads in a row; it is thirteen heads in a row followed by sixteen heads in a row with a tail in the middle.

    No one comes to the forums to report an alternating sequence of "good" and "bad" pulls, even though a perfectly alternating sequence would be just as randomly improbable as all good or all bad pulls. People only remember and report on what they think is significant, except that intuition is essentially worthless.

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/roots-of-unity/has-anyone-ever-flipped-heads-76-times-in-a-row/

    Food for thought...and I think the issue isn’t that the odds of any two particular 30-flip sequences are equivalent, but that the odds of an all single outcome run are astronomically low. But that’s not the crystal result the OP takes issue with anyway...

    Dr. Zola

    This is two different overlapping subjects. The post above directly responds to the idea of "streaks" and that idea alone. I'm responding to him directly. Second, I would be surprised by 76 heads in a row, but *exactly* as much as I would be surprised by 76 alternating heads and tails in a row: the odds against are exactly the same.

    The OP is saying that he looked back at ten pulls and noticed something weird: none of the champs were released after May. But that's a separate issue I took up in an entirely different post which contains a related idea: the notion that "unusual" is not something you can judge *after* generating results in the same way as you can when testing for them *before* generating results.
«13
This discussion has been closed.