Black Widow 3% Evade? Cool Story Bro

DTMelodicMetal

https://youtu.be/XScv3vGKWXw

3% evade chance working as intended

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

DrBruceWayne

CFree wrote: »

The_Unknown wrote: »

The game seems to use independent events of probability rather than dependent events

That’s because they are independent events. Right?

Apparently they are, although for the case of crystals, it kind of makes more sense to use dependent events

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Icecold2099

BitterSteel wrote: »

Yes, that is what it means. DNA isn’t saying that she WILL absolutely evade 1 every 33 hits. That’s why he said “on average”. He said just simplifying it to what it will average out to, so it’s not just a number, but an easy way to understand percentages.

E.g. 50% means on average the event will occur 1 out of 2 times. It is, of course, possible for it not to occur 1 out of 2. But the percentage “50%” implies on average it will be 1 out of 2.

Actually there is a way for players to say otherwise. If you know your statistics and statistical tests, you could use one of them to test whether there is a statistical difference. What I’d do is get footage of perhaps 2 or 3 hundred continuous fights against black widow of 50ish hits each. This would provide a large sample of hits to investigate. (What I mean by “continuous” is not cut to and from. One long video where you fight a black widow and exit and go in again. This is to cut out any potential bias). Once this footage has been obtained go through and note down every hit landed, then add on every hit into black widows block, then minus any hits while widow was stunned.

Obviously no AA reduction champs should be used, nor should the assassin mastery be active. Then you can count the evades and you’ll have 10,000-15,000 hits and X evades. Then you could use the t-test or Chi squared to test for a statistical difference.

You’d then have your answer. If you believe kabam rig the odds, I’d love to see what you come out with.

I'm going to respectively disagree.

Yes a 50% chance of something would on average produce a 1 out of 2 chance, if its a blanket 50% chance of a multiple.

If you have a x% chance of something happening on 1 individual thing there is no average that can be applied to a single action. An average requires a multiple of things in order to.be calculated. Therefore, you cannot apply an average to anything that is based off of a single thing. You cannot flip a coin once and say that there's an average applied to that 1 flip.

You assume that because you attack multiple times in a fight that the average can be taken and the percentage applied to that whole fight, when in fact it cannot. A 3% chance of a sigle item is just that, a 3% chance and can't be anything more. No matter how many times that single item comes up, it itself only has a 3% chance.

You also cannot prove it with any amount of statistical testing because you can't test a single item with statistics. Statistics also require multiples. So even if tou ran the test as you stated it, the bottom line would still be speculation, albiet based on testing, but not proven.

The response would still be exactly as Kabam Mike mentions above. Even if you multipled your testing by 10 or even 100 fights the same response would still apply.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Icecold2099

Okay so how many times does something happen if it can only happen 3% of 1 time?

unknown

This content has been removed.

BigDaddyJoe

If you guys don’t think Kabam can turn the dials some to adjust certain scenarios then your either naive or gulable

unknown

This content has been removed.

Icecold2099

My point is that the 3% chance of BW evading is on a single item. So the sample size is 1 so it's either going to happen or not going to happen, but there is no way to predict how often it does happen or not happen because each sample size is only 1.

It does not scale up in any way. Because the percentage is per attack and not per fight. The second attack does not include any calculations/information from the first attack when considering the 3% chance to evade, therefore both attacks cannot be combined into an average of eachother as they are not related.

CFree

Icecold2099 wrote: »

Okay so how many times does something happen if it can only happen 3% of 1 time?

It has a 3% chance to happen that one time. Not that “it can only happen 3% of 1 time.”

DTMelodicMetal

Did not expect this thread to get this much attention lol. Kabam Miike explained how the 3% evade chance works, even with multivariate statistics experience from graduate school probability is not easy to comprehend.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Icecold2099

Even though you're wrong as you insist on applying an average to a single item, how about you continue to think that i don't understand and I'll continue to think that you don't understand and we just agree to disagree.

I have actual important things to do....

unknown

This content has been removed.

Icecold2099

Awe the kids have to get one more dig in. Good job on that one really cut me to the core.

You're so awesome.

I agree you can't argue with math.
However you're applying math to a scenario that's just not there. Take your egotistical blinders off and realize that I'm saying the same thing kabam mike said. There's no way to pridict in any way how often BW is going to evade. No average that can be applied. Get a clue already. I mean is written in black and white.

Maybe you're super good at math, but your reading comprehension skills are less than adequate...

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Shrimkins

Verzz wrote: »

“I agree you can not argue math”

Proceeds to argue that a 3% chance can not be predicted.

Lol

I think he's just trying to argue over semantics. Of course we can never "predict" what will happen on the next attack, like he keeps saying. All we can do is provide the probability that an event may or may not occur and draw conclusions from that.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Shrimkins

yeah... I'm not going to try and defend his position, just pointing there seems to be a failure to communicate here.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Shrimkins

Verzz wrote: »

I'll try one last time and the be done with this thread, I actually don't know why I have bothered to post as much as I have:

What we are essentially discussing here is a card game where there are 33 cards in the deck and 32 of them are aces(not evade). One is a joker(evade). The game is you flip the top card and if it is a joker you win and if it is an ace you lose. When the game is finished the cards get reshuffled.

In this game because the cards are reshuffled after each game the games are independent of each other, same as the hits vs BW. If you can not see how this can be predicted then I can not break it down in any other way I can think of.

This is the best analogy that can be applied to this game.

I completely agree with you. He is just using the word "predict" different than you.

When he says "predict" I think he is saying: "to know with 100% certainty what the next outcome will be"

When you say "predict" you are saying: "we can use the laws of probability to describe the chance something will happen and make assumptions based on that information"

Not the same things.

Hendross

winterthur wrote: »

Kabam Miike wrote: »

Hey OP,

This looks normal to me, unless I'm missing something. 3% Chance to Evade per hit does not mean she will only evade 3 out of 100 attacks, or even a guarantee that she would evade 1 in 1000. This is not how probability works. With a 3% chance per attack, there's a slim chance that you could throw 100 attacks, and she could evade each and every one of them.

If I am not mistaken, it 4% to roll a 4* champ from PHC. Technically I can open 100 PHCs and every champ is a 4* ?

1.6e-140

or

.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000016

unknown

This content has been removed.