**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Are you serious Kabam.???
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Pseudo-random number generators are called pseudo-random because they aren't actually random (they are generated by formula) but they appear to be random if you don't know the generating algorithm. Any pseudo-random number generator that had the property you mention, that they have a greater chance to generate the same number twice than random chance would dictate, would be drop-dead awful and no one would use it.
If you care about randomness a lot, like for simulations and such, you'll probably use something like Mersenne Twister. This is a PRNG that is often used for things like computational simulations where any correlation like you describe would break the program. MT is very, very good. It isn't perfect, but no human being is going to find an anomaly with human eyeballs if they lived to be a trillion years old.
If you don't care all that much, you'll just use the rand() function in your C library. Which is horrible in mathematical terms, but not that horrible in video game terms. Pretty much all of them are what's known as LCGs. They all look basically like this: R(n+1) = R * A + B mod 2^C. For example the gcc library uses (last I checked) R(n+1) = (R * 1103515245 + 12345) mod 2^31.
I'm wondering if you somehow stumbled on a very technical article on LCGs and simply didn't understand it. LCGs are vulnerable to what's sometimes referred to as serial correlation, which means they can fail spectral test of tuples (breaking the sequence down to groups of two or more and comparing the probability of different groups of numbers showing up). However, no LCG I'm aware of actually produces numbers where the odds of generating the previous number are significantly higher than any other result. That's not what "serial correlation" refers to here.
No one player is going to see the flaws in LCGs used in computer library implementations unless they dug up a computer from the 1960s, and probably not even then. For example, if you want to catch the typical C library PRNG being "not really random" an experiment you could do would be to open three like crystals all at once, record what came out, do that one billion times, and graph the results. You'd see some triple combinations showing up somewhat more often than others, maybe by 1% or so.
Anything less than that, and if you think you're seeing a PRNG problem, you aren't. No PRNG that ships with any modern anything is bad enough to tell in a setting like a video game.
Everyone who says "I saw it" never seen able to point to actual evidence of them seeing this, which is pretty bad given that we're talking about Youtube recordings anyone can reference.
I don't bother anymore because the amount of work is huge, and it never seems to convince anyone to drop their intuitive, but provably incorrect, assumptions.
True story: on these very forums someone claimed that the drops people were reporting for the Cinematic crystal proved those crystals were highly skewed. They claimed it was blatantly obvious. So I simply took the posts and spreadsheeted them, and what do you know, that skew wasn't there. They then claimed that the skew was a completely different skew than they initially claimed, so I redid the data that way, and once again the skew vanished. To the best of my knowledge, they never once reversed their position. In fact, a week later they doubled down on it, I posted a link to that previous data, and they disappeared again. They probably still believe that crystal was rigged, even though their own source for data proved it wasn't.
Because this isn't about data. This is about people creating a narrative in their own head, and then remembering every time the world confirmed it and forgetting or ignoring every time it didn't..
A lot of people genuinely think everyone else is like them. That if they want to rank X instead of Y, so would everyone else. That everyone wants the god tier champ that they think are god tier champs and want to rank them up in the same order they would. So the game also knows this, and can decide to give a player something they don't want.
The game cannot do that to me, because the game cannot possibly predict what I want. Because none of you can predict what I want. And none of you can predict what everyone else would want.
Once you realize that everyone is different, the idea that you can predict what everyone wants becomes ludicrous (or, you can simply have enough experience to have seen this first hand, something I've seen myself with other games). And once you realize it is impossible to predict what everyone would want, the idea that the game servers are doing that and changing crystals on the fly based on that prediction becomes equally silly. Some people want different champs. Some want to dup their existing champs. Some want the god tier champs. Some just want to collect their favorite champs. Some want to rank their top champ to max rank. Some want to rank a bunch of champs to medium ranks. The game cannot possibly rig crystals to account for all of this. It would be silly.
You don't need to know anything about math or computational algorithms or video game design. All you need to know is no one person represent everyone else, and it becomes obvious the game cannot read the minds of every player and adjust crystals customized to every single player. It is just a ridiculous idea on its face.
Option 2 is trade in the ones in overflow and hope you get a mutant (or even trade everything)
The option will depend on your patience and how much you want him rank4
So instead of the game having some sort of superhuman powers, could it be that because you are looking to get 1 class from 6 and that would be why you think the game doesn't give you want.
Lets really think about this for a minute.... What benefit is there for you not to get what you want? Why would Kabam design a game read your mind and prevent you from ranking champs up by keeping T4CC from you? You rarely can buy them with units or money so throw monetary motive out the window.
The more content you try and complete, the more chance you have to spend to buy pots and energy refills. So you'd think if anything, they'd rather give you everything you need.
Maybe the only solution left is that its just random results and your brain cant process that you didn't get what you wanted so you have to blame it on something. 🤷
Let me know if you want to give me that $50k. My friend is legit serious.
It probably is just bad rng, but enough s*** pulls from endgame content and other players to notice a pattern that could create the idea the game is working against the majority.
This kind of things always happen in every Rng games.(maybe) Always not get things that you want
Plus same thing in Catalyst Don't mind Extra cost.
It's really hard to Collect Shards 5 and 6 stars specially and opening a meme tier champ makes disheartened to play further. We want to enjoy game not getting offended with it.
It would be WAY TOO EXPENSIVE for kabam to rig crystals. They would have to set up servers dedicated to scanning peoples rosters and also to determine who they want to rank up.
It would not be worth the investment at all.
I understand that it’s rng. I understand that player’ resource demand also change. If a player has consistently committed to the same class rank up (say ranking up a 5* Cg) over an extended period of time, and more often than not they get every other class t4cc except the desired...I’m not goin to blame the guy if he thinks something is up.