I am convinced..

AceOfDiamond

... that t4cc crystal chances are rigged based on what you have in your inventory. Today I needed to form a mystic or a mutant to get my first r4. I already had 3 of them. So I would have gladly accepted either one of them after opening 12 crystals. But nope.. Nothing, just more of what I already had.
I don't even want to post pictures as there are tons of posts opening even more crystals and not getting what they want. But this needs to change. This just adds to player frustration. For those that are going to say its just rng, I only have two r3 five stars, one mutant and one mystic. So obviously the game knows which one I want to r4 and it skews the odds against me pulling those required cats..
If this game isn't about pulling and upgrading champs you like then its failing its purpose by not letting us do that.. Creating unnecessary bottlenecks is just plain and simple BAD.
For the mathematician in the house, I believe my probability of not getting either of the two catalyst is (4/6)^12 = 0.77% approx. Correct me if I am wrong.

This is not okay and Kabam needs to respond about this and change things up.

Eb0ny-O-M4w

That is a fake theory

Zuro

No

Agent_X_zzz

this is a intersting theory, but in reality it is very inaccurate there is still 1/6 chances to get a mutant or mystic t4cc, opening 6 would not guarantee anything it is still 1/6 chances to get that mutant catalyst whether you open 1 or 100

Zodiac_Signs

Neither for nor against the RNG theory but out of curiosity, for everyone out there, what kind of pulls would convince you that there is no RNG?

AceOfDiamond

Funny thing is I already had a feeling that I am not going to get what I want even before I opened the crystals.... You guys keep defending KABAM. Good for you.
What is the probability you do not roll either a 6 or 5 if you roll a dice 12 times. Go try it and see how many times you don't get either 5/6 in 12 rolls.

FlashSpidey

From my (very bad) understanding of statistics and probability, this falls for many fallacies. First off, consider a coin. What are the odds of heads? 50%. OK, do the odds change if I tell you I just got tails 5 times in a row? It is still 50/50. This is the Gambler's Fallacy. Look into it, it could save you money. The other fallacy is thinking your data is large enough. Consider how many millions if players play the game worldwide. Now cinsider how many people open those crystals. Then considee this, if that many people open that many crystals, if anything I'd be more surprised if someone didn't get screwed like this. Theoretically, over enough times, every single combination should happen to every single player. You are trying to apply these laws of large amounts of data to an amount that, while it might not seem like it, is miniscule.

Basically, you are falling for the Law of Small Numbers(aka Hasty Generalization/induction) and the Gambler's Fallacy. I would greatly advise you to educate yourself on these topics. Here is a random source I found: http://bjlkeng.github.io/posts/gamblers-fallacy-and-the-law-of-small-numbers/

One last thing, I just saw your other comment about no rng. You are right. It isn't random. Actually, it is impossible to find a video game with true randomness. Computers can't do it. It can only be found in nature. Thus, computers use something called pseudo rng. Basically, there is a long list of predetermined numbers. A game will then give you a seed based on something(for example, it is common to use time since creation of something). You will then be assigned a number that far down the list. You continue from there. It is a pretty good way to do randomness and works pretty randomly though technically it isn't true randomness. I don't know how MCOC decides its seeds but if you figure it out, tell us please as it could possibly be manipulated.