Ok, this thread has gotten more than a little combative, so we are going to close it down. Additionally, as we've mentioned multiple times in the past, the drop rates shown on a crystal are accurate to the odds for that Crystal. This is because the game pulls the numbers it displays directly from the game's code.
It's just a debate, no harm done really. By the way if anyone's reading this and it looks like my points are incomplete or my argument is disjointed, it's because some of my posts and others have been removed for some reason. I didn't even use any profanity I don't think but I guess some words (that I wouldn't consider vulgar) are banned on the forums. I won't repeat them here for obvious reasons.
TLDR I saw a lot of people saying incorrect things about probability and I wanted to correct the maths. The fact that some people disagree with me still is worrying when Ive tried to explain that the statistics for opening these crystals is simply given by a binomial distribution (this is irrefutable and basic, well known mathematics.) After that it turned into a debate on a claim vs fact and all I wanted to do was to encourage critical thinking, an important skill in life.
You were officially told by a mod that they aren't any different than what's displayed and you still can't accept it.
Come on man do you seriously not understand my argument by now? I personally never said the drop rates were anything but what kabam claimed (1% taken from game code). I simply said that for this claim to be turned into a fact it needs to be substantiated with proof/evidence in the form of a large sample of data. That would be very simple as if kabam said, for example, 100,000 7 stars were opened from 10 million crystals then we could be very certain the drop rates were very accurate, cf the law of large numbers and binomial distributions.
You also did not address my other points. Such as the fact that I wanted to correct a lot of misinformation and confusion surrounding statistics such as people thinking there is no difference in probability between getting 5 7* from a stack of 100 or 0, when there absolutely is.
Also you completely disregarded another one of my most important points which is encouraging critical thinking. Here is a definition in case you do not understand the term: "Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation." There are many many discussions on why this skill is so important and I recommend you go look some up. What this means is reserving judgement on a claim until appropriate research can be done and evidence provided before making a judgement. For example, kabam have said the drop rates are 1% for a 7* and that this value comes directly from the game code. Now I can say to myself "ok that makes sense, I assume the drop rates are 1%" but to be sure of this I would need to analyse the data/evidence to come to a thorough conclusion.
That's a lot of words just to say that you still don't believe the drop rates are what they are.
Ok, this thread has gotten more than a little combative, so we are going to close it down. Additionally, as we've mentioned multiple times in the past, the drop rates shown on a crystal are accurate to the odds for that Crystal. This is because the game pulls the numbers it displays directly from the game's code.
It's just a debate, no harm done really. By the way if anyone's reading this and it looks like my points are incomplete or my argument is disjointed, it's because some of my posts and others have been removed for some reason. I didn't even use any profanity I don't think but I guess some words (that I wouldn't consider vulgar) are banned on the forums. I won't repeat them here for obvious reasons.
TLDR I saw a lot of people saying incorrect things about probability and I wanted to correct the maths. The fact that some people disagree with me still is worrying when Ive tried to explain that the statistics for opening these crystals is simply given by a binomial distribution (this is irrefutable and basic, well known mathematics.) After that it turned into a debate on a claim vs fact and all I wanted to do was to encourage critical thinking, an important skill in life.
You were officially told by a mod that they aren't any different than what's displayed and you still can't accept it.
Come on man do you seriously not understand my argument by now? I personally never said the drop rates were anything but what kabam claimed (1% taken from game code). I simply said that for this claim to be turned into a fact it needs to be substantiated with proof/evidence in the form of a large sample of data. That would be very simple as if kabam said, for example, 100,000 7 stars were opened from 10 million crystals then we could be very certain the drop rates were very accurate, cf the law of large numbers and binomial distributions.
You also did not address my other points. Such as the fact that I wanted to correct a lot of misinformation and confusion surrounding statistics such as people thinking there is no difference in probability between getting 5 7* from a stack of 100 or 0, when there absolutely is.
Also you completely disregarded another one of my most important points which is encouraging critical thinking. Here is a definition in case you do not understand the term: "Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation." There are many many discussions on why this skill is so important and I recommend you go look some up. What this means is reserving judgement on a claim until appropriate research can be done and evidence provided before making a judgement. For example, kabam have said the drop rates are 1% for a 7* and that this value comes directly from the game code. Now I can say to myself "ok that makes sense, I assume the drop rates are 1%" but to be sure of this I would need to analyse the data/evidence to come to a thorough conclusion.
That's a lot of words just to say that you still don't believe the drop rates are what they are.
It's not my fault you can't comprehend what I'm saying. For the record not once have I said that I believe kabam are lying about the drop rates as anyone intelligent can see if they read through my posts on this thread.
Ok, this thread has gotten more than a little combative, so we are going to close it down. Additionally, as we've mentioned multiple times in the past, the drop rates shown on a crystal are accurate to the odds for that Crystal. This is because the game pulls the numbers it displays directly from the game's code.
It's just a debate, no harm done really. By the way if anyone's reading this and it looks like my points are incomplete or my argument is disjointed, it's because some of my posts and others have been removed for some reason. I didn't even use any profanity I don't think but I guess some words (that I wouldn't consider vulgar) are banned on the forums. I won't repeat them here for obvious reasons.
TLDR I saw a lot of people saying incorrect things about probability and I wanted to correct the maths. The fact that some people disagree with me still is worrying when Ive tried to explain that the statistics for opening these crystals is simply given by a binomial distribution (this is irrefutable and basic, well known mathematics.) After that it turned into a debate on a claim vs fact and all I wanted to do was to encourage critical thinking, an important skill in life.
You were officially told by a mod that they aren't any different than what's displayed and you still can't accept it.
Come on man do you seriously not understand my argument by now? I personally never said the drop rates were anything but what kabam claimed (1% taken from game code). I simply said that for this claim to be turned into a fact it needs to be substantiated with proof/evidence in the form of a large sample of data. That would be very simple as if kabam said, for example, 100,000 7 stars were opened from 10 million crystals then we could be very certain the drop rates were very accurate, cf the law of large numbers and binomial distributions.
You also did not address my other points. Such as the fact that I wanted to correct a lot of misinformation and confusion surrounding statistics such as people thinking there is no difference in probability between getting 5 7* from a stack of 100 or 0, when there absolutely is.
Also you completely disregarded another one of my most important points which is encouraging critical thinking. Here is a definition in case you do not understand the term: "Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation." There are many many discussions on why this skill is so important and I recommend you go look some up. What this means is reserving judgement on a claim until appropriate research can be done and evidence provided before making a judgement. For example, kabam have said the drop rates are 1% for a 7* and that this value comes directly from the game code. Now I can say to myself "ok that makes sense, I assume the drop rates are 1%" but to be sure of this I would need to analyse the data/evidence to come to a thorough conclusion.
That's a lot of words just to say that you still don't believe the drop rates are what they are.
It's not my fault you can't comprehend what I'm saying. For the record not once have I said that I believe kabam are lying about the drop rates as anyone intelligent can see if they read through my posts on this thread.
I've been saying this for years. The drop rates are likely correct in the whole of mcoc but those who are not as skilled or whale out (ie prof hoff for both) tend to be on the "luckier" side with crystals pulls compared to ftp. For example my smaller second account that I never really play, pulled 6 star jessica Jones from like 10 gifting crystals in December.
Ok, this thread has gotten more than a little combative, so we are going to close it down. Additionally, as we've mentioned multiple times in the past, the drop rates shown on a crystal are accurate to the odds for that Crystal. This is because the game pulls the numbers it displays directly from the game's code.
@Kabam Zibiit I think you missed the close button. These guys aren’t gonna quit.
Wow so much stupidity in this thread.. its a RNG based game just live with it.. u will get ur cherish-able moment soon..
Not a single thing I've said in this thread has been incorrect or stupid. But yes I agree people saying that "probability has nothing to do with opening crystals" is the height of stupidity.
Ok, this thread has gotten more than a little combative, so we are going to close it down. Additionally, as we've mentioned multiple times in the past, the drop rates shown on a crystal are accurate to the odds for that Crystal. This is because the game pulls the numbers it displays directly from the game's code.
It's just a debate, no harm done really. By the way if anyone's reading this and it looks like my points are incomplete or my argument is disjointed, it's because some of my posts and others have been removed for some reason. I didn't even use any profanity I don't think but I guess some words (that I wouldn't consider vulgar) are banned on the forums. I won't repeat them here for obvious reasons.
TLDR I saw a lot of people saying incorrect things about probability and I wanted to correct the maths. The fact that some people disagree with me still is worrying when Ive tried to explain that the statistics for opening these crystals is simply given by a binomial distribution (this is irrefutable and basic, well known mathematics.) After that it turned into a debate on a claim vs fact and all I wanted to do was to encourage critical thinking, an important skill in life.
You were officially told by a mod that they aren't any different than what's displayed and you still can't accept it.
Come on man do you seriously not understand my argument by now? I personally never said the drop rates were anything but what kabam claimed (1% taken from game code). I simply said that for this claim to be turned into a fact it needs to be substantiated with proof/evidence in the form of a large sample of data. That would be very simple as if kabam said, for example, 100,000 7 stars were opened from 10 million crystals then we could be very certain the drop rates were very accurate, cf the law of large numbers and binomial distributions.
You also did not address my other points. Such as the fact that I wanted to correct a lot of misinformation and confusion surrounding statistics such as people thinking there is no difference in probability between getting 5 7* from a stack of 100 or 0, when there absolutely is.
Also you completely disregarded another one of my most important points which is encouraging critical thinking. Here is a definition in case you do not understand the term: "Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation." There are many many discussions on why this skill is so important and I recommend you go look some up. What this means is reserving judgement on a claim until appropriate research can be done and evidence provided before making a judgement. For example, kabam have said the drop rates are 1% for a 7* and that this value comes directly from the game code. Now I can say to myself "ok that makes sense, I assume the drop rates are 1%" but to be sure of this I would need to analyse the data/evidence to come to a thorough conclusion.
That's a lot of words just to say that you still don't believe the drop rates are what they are.
It's not my fault you can't comprehend what I'm saying. For the record not once have I said that I believe kabam are lying about the drop rates as anyone intelligent can see if they read through my posts on this thread.
I've been saying this for years. The drop rates are likely correct in the whole of mcoc but those who are not as skilled or whale out (ie prof hoff for both) tend to be on the "luckier" side with crystals pulls compared to ftp. For example my smaller second account that I never really play, pulled 6 star jessica Jones from like 10 gifting crystals in December.
Whaling does not mean more luck or anything like that. They just seem luckier because they open more at a time and larger volumes than the average summoner.
That's some slick talk you’re trying to backtrack (but then continue on same track again)
OP starts by saying in their last 15 pulls, all had been 4* (of which, if I recall it being 50% for a 4*, leads to the 0.003% odds that were stated here later, **although I’ll suggest an addendum note after this). Pretty unlucky, YES. Incredibly unlucky, you could probably call it that too.
You claim now that you were initially just correcting someone's math. Well, NO, nobody had actually presented any math which was incorrect in the first place. Correcting someone's claim on how probability works ? well I really didn’t see any false claims either, except for different people claiming the odds were “rigged”, to which replies were saying it's NOT rigged, it's a coded 1% chance PER CRYSTAL of getting a 7*.
People trying to read your's now getting an incomplete/disjointed view, well your posts were there before any Mods came by yesterday that all those involved had clearly seen. And with 17 of your replies STILL there from yesterday (plus more today) hard to claim any pertinent portions are missing now (and even if so, would still be included in other's “quoted” portions).
Saying you don’t dispute the stated 1% odds, while also saying that you can’t (won't) know that for sure unless Kabam shows you imperial evidence, is yes basically saying you don’t believe the stated odds. Other places you said that from what you’ve heard other people say, the odds could maybe be half that (with lawyer-speak again saying though that you would need proof one way or another before you actually could know for sure).
(*Addendum) to the “LAST 15 pulls being 4*, resulting in 0.003% odds”.
I would actually suggest that since they said just the LAST 15, that means they had opened some beforehand as well. And KNOWING those prior results, choosing to use a cut-off point for the probability set is slightly misleading if we calculate the odds using the set size of 15. Because I would venture to say that OP did in fact have something OTHER than a 4* in at least the most immediate pull prior to the set of 15. (**and could have in fact had much better results in MANY of them prior to the 15, but since that is unknown I will just deal with the ONE immediately beforehand)
(although OP didn’t actually mention it being 0.003%, but that's what was being used here afterwards)
For example, using Heads (let’s call Heads a W for a Win) and Tails (let’s call Tails a Loss), for thinking of it in Sports terms, but with defined 50% odds each (no Ties). If you were to get W.L.L.L and then trying to say “wow, how unlucky, 3 Losses in a row, what are the odds”.
Well, if you had no idea what any prior outcomes were, then you could be correct in saying the odds of 3 Losses in a row would be 12.5% But KNOWING that you are using a Streak wherein you knowingly are starting a streak point because you know the opposite outcome was in the immediate flip/game before the streak, don’t you really have to then take that prior result into account too. And the first Loss of the streak really has to be offset by the Win beforehand.
So if all you were given was a Streak # during a season (except for if at the very start of the season), you would infer to know what the outcome of the game immediately prior to the streak was. And if that was all you were given, then it would be the game 2 games prior which would be the last actual “unknown” point. So, you would really have to look at it *either* as a “1 Win, 3 Loss” sample size. *or* as just a “2 Loss” sample size. But NOT a “3 Loss” sample size.
Boils down the OP statement (last 15 pulls) as really being approx 0.006% instead of 0.003%. Yes, still really unlucky, and no still not rigged.
In my 7 years of playing this game, I’ve always found that the more crystals you open at one time (10 or 20) vs. opening 1 or 2 crystals at a time, (prior to 7* champs) your chances of landing a 5* or 6* champ is way higher if you open them 10 at a time.
I can’t speak for others, but this is normally why I save up my crystals until I have a bunch to open (at least 20).
I have been really lucky on these paragon crystals (opened about 60 and got 3 7*s). So this time I am on the good side of the odds. However, during the rift side quest a few months ago, people were getting multiple 6* awakening gems I got total trash the whole event. Over time the luck evens out.
I have been really lucky on these paragon crystals (opened about 60 and got 3 7*s). So this time I am on the good side of the odds. However, during the rift side quest a few months ago, people were getting multiple 6* awakening gems I got total trash the whole event. Over time the luck evens out.
Well that explains why I haven’t gotten one yet from there
Wow so much stupidity in this thread.. its a RNG based game just live with it.. u will get ur cherish-able moment soon..
Not a single thing I've said in this thread has been incorrect or stupid. But yes I agree people saying that "probability has nothing to do with opening crystals" is the height of stupidity.
Not one single thing no, but close to everything you said...yes.
C'mon... Facts, evidence. For some here they already Out of the Window. Only conspiracy.
Adding fantasy/ficton Characters to the discussion (that cant be proved for Sure(lol)) dosent do any more damage. Was ment to be funny. Scrulls are already a meme in the Forums.
I apologise for not being funny If u do not like it.
C'mon... Facts, evidence. For some here they already Out of the Window. Only conspiracy.
Adding fantasy/ficton Characters to the discussion (that cant be proved for Sure(lol)) dosent do any more damage. Was ment to be funny. Scrulls are already a meme in the Forums.
I apologise for not being funny If u do not like it.
I debated whether it was sarcasm, but responded logically just to be safe. Apologies for being too literal. Text doesn't have inflection. Lol.
Alright everyone... This thread is rife with aggressive speculation and conspiracy theories (and a lot of bickering), so we're going to shut it down.
RNG is random (it's right there in the title). Both sides can argue "prove it" until the cows come home; neither side is able to "prove" anything.
The drop rates are as advertised. It wouldn't only be wildly unethical to lie about them, it would also be illegal. There is zero reasonable motivation to lie about this.
Comments
I've been saying this for years. The drop rates are likely correct in the whole of mcoc but those who are not as skilled or whale out (ie prof hoff for both) tend to be on the "luckier" side with crystals pulls compared to ftp. For example my smaller second account that I never really play, pulled 6 star jessica Jones from like 10 gifting crystals in December.
OP starts by saying in their last 15 pulls, all had been 4* (of which, if I recall it being 50% for a 4*, leads to the 0.003% odds that were stated here later, **although I’ll suggest an addendum note after this). Pretty unlucky, YES. Incredibly unlucky, you could probably call it that too.
You claim now that you were initially just correcting someone's math. Well, NO, nobody had actually presented any math which was incorrect in the first place. Correcting someone's claim on how probability works ? well I really didn’t see any false claims either, except for different people claiming the odds were “rigged”, to which replies were saying it's NOT rigged, it's a coded 1% chance PER CRYSTAL of getting a 7*.
People trying to read your's now getting an incomplete/disjointed view, well your posts were there before any Mods came by yesterday that all those involved had clearly seen. And with 17 of your replies STILL there from yesterday (plus more today) hard to claim any pertinent portions are missing now (and even if so, would still be included in other's “quoted” portions).
Saying you don’t dispute the stated 1% odds, while also saying that you can’t (won't) know that for sure unless Kabam shows you imperial evidence, is yes basically saying you don’t believe the stated odds. Other places you said that from what you’ve heard other people say, the odds could maybe be half that (with lawyer-speak again saying though that you would need proof one way or another before you actually could know for sure).
I would actually suggest that since they said just the LAST 15, that means they had opened some beforehand as well. And KNOWING those prior results, choosing to use a cut-off point for the probability set is slightly misleading if we calculate the odds using the set size of 15. Because I would venture to say that OP did in fact have something OTHER than a 4* in at least the most immediate pull prior to the set of 15. (**and could have in fact had much better results in MANY of them prior to the 15, but since that is unknown I will just deal with the ONE immediately beforehand)
(although OP didn’t actually mention it being 0.003%, but that's what was being used here afterwards)
For example, using Heads (let’s call Heads a W for a Win) and Tails (let’s call Tails a Loss), for thinking of it in Sports terms, but with defined 50% odds each (no Ties).
If you were to get W.L.L.L and then trying to say “wow, how unlucky, 3 Losses in a row, what are the odds”.
Well, if you had no idea what any prior outcomes were, then you could be correct in saying the odds of 3 Losses in a row would be 12.5%
But KNOWING that you are using a Streak wherein you knowingly are starting a streak point because you know the opposite outcome was in the immediate flip/game before the streak, don’t you really have to then take that prior result into account too.
And the first Loss of the streak really has to be offset by the Win beforehand.
So if all you were given was a Streak # during a season (except for if at the very start of the season), you would infer to know what the outcome of the game immediately prior to the streak was. And if that was all you were given, then it would be the game 2 games prior which would be the last actual “unknown” point.
So, you would really have to look at it *either* as a “1 Win, 3 Loss” sample size. *or* as just a “2 Loss” sample size. But NOT a “3 Loss” sample size.
Boils down the OP statement (last 15 pulls) as really being approx 0.006% instead of 0.003%.
Yes, still really unlucky, and no still not rigged.
I can’t speak for others, but this is normally why I save up my crystals until I have a bunch to open (at least 20).
Facts, evidence. For some here they already Out of the Window. Only conspiracy.
Adding fantasy/ficton Characters to the discussion (that cant be proved for Sure(lol)) dosent do any more damage.
Was ment to be funny. Scrulls are already a meme in the Forums.
I apologise for not being funny If u do not like it.
This thread is rife with aggressive speculation and conspiracy theories (and a lot of bickering), so we're going to shut it down.
RNG is random (it's right there in the title). Both sides can argue "prove it" until the cows come home; neither side is able to "prove" anything.
The drop rates are as advertised. It wouldn't only be wildly unethical to lie about them, it would also be illegal. There is zero reasonable motivation to lie about this.