Potential Delay to v44.1 Launch
We are currently working through some issues that may affect the release window of v44.1. This means that the update may not release on Monday as it usually does. We are working to resolve the issue holding us up as quickly as possible, but will keep you all updated, especially if the delay results in any changes to the content release schedule.
We are currently working through some issues that may affect the release window of v44.1. This means that the update may not release on Monday as it usually does. We are working to resolve the issue holding us up as quickly as possible, but will keep you all updated, especially if the delay results in any changes to the content release schedule.
Options
Paragon Crystal Drop Rate Sus
This discussion has been closed.
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.