What are the most generally pulled 6*s?

I know DXF and King Groot have to be in the top ten (and I have both). I've also seen a lot of kingpins and green goblins around. Are those the most common pulls in this completely RNG crystal lol?

Comments

spaceoctopus

DNA3000 wrote: »

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I do find it strange that our alliance so often ends up with trash on top, but whatever, guess by the law of averages that means we're due for a great spell of openings coming soon.

I don't find this particularly strange. You're concentrating on the wrong odds. You're asking what are the odds of thirty people in one alliance having the especially bad luck you've observed. But the correct question is, what are the odds that you and the other twenty nine members of your alliance just happen to be the exceptional one in a million human being that can report these odds correctly through nothing but observation without rigorous hard data collection to analyze? This has been tested scientifically: the odds of that being the case here are incredibly low.

If you had a spreadsheet of all the drops pulled by all the members of your alliance across a multi-year timeframe immune to selection bias that could be independently analyzed, that would be something. But the anecdotal observation that your alliance consistently gets "unlucky drops" requires that the person making that observation have literally superhuman observational skills.

Lol, wow.

Well I did have all of our pulls collected on spread sheets. Not difficult data to collect. Screen cap the alliance activity tab, not much room for human error that way either.

DNA3000

spaceoctopus wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I do find it strange that our alliance so often ends up with trash on top, but whatever, guess by the law of averages that means we're due for a great spell of openings coming soon.

I don't find this particularly strange. You're concentrating on the wrong odds. You're asking what are the odds of thirty people in one alliance having the especially bad luck you've observed. But the correct question is, what are the odds that you and the other twenty nine members of your alliance just happen to be the exceptional one in a million human being that can report these odds correctly through nothing but observation without rigorous hard data collection to analyze? This has been tested scientifically: the odds of that being the case here are incredibly low.

If you had a spreadsheet of all the drops pulled by all the members of your alliance across a multi-year timeframe immune to selection bias that could be independently analyzed, that would be something. But the anecdotal observation that your alliance consistently gets "unlucky drops" requires that the person making that observation have literally superhuman observational skills.

Lol, wow.

Your reaction is the expected one, consistent with the basic phenomenon. Maybe if this wasn't true, reports of statistical infidelity would be taken more seriously when they occurred, but when to a first order approximation all of them are both inaccurate yet vigorously prosecuted, the return on investment on pursuing any of them is essentially zero. I've actually found statistical anomalies traceable to bugs in game code before, and the effort it takes to break through the natural resistance to examining such reports is astronomically high. But it is understandable, because if you could bet against every player making these observations, you wouldn't need to work as a game developer anymore.

Well I did have all of our pulls collected on spread sheets. Not difficult data to collect. Screen cap the alliance activity tab, not much room for human error that way either.

Maybe next time you should lead with that, if that data actually exists. But given the practical limitations of alliance chat scrollback, anyone saying this is easy data to collect isn't likely to have actually tried to do it.

spaceoctopus

Ok I'm done. Thanks for picking on me. I was asking a legit question, just wanted to know the most common 6* pulls. Then when presented with data from the cinematic crystal I admitted my previous inclination was wrong. Yet I'm continued to be bashed in here. There was no reason to being up my "data" in the first part of this thread, because that wasn't the point. Now why you don't you go pick apart the posters in the 5* featured crystal thread, because those guys are actually saying all the stuff that you're implying I am.

If anyone has a link or graph it anything that shows who has pulled what 6*s so there's an idea of which are currently more common place in the game I'd appreciate seeing it. Again after all that's all the information I was actually after.

spaceoctopus

I took no offense to anything you said @BitterSteel I understand the variation due to champs being added later. However, despite the RNG there are certainly more prevalent 6*s in the game than others. Again, that's how RNG works. That's the info I was looking for, just a type of statistical breakdown of who is out there

Werewrym

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I took no offense to anything you said @BitterSteel I understand the variation due to champs being added later. However, despite the RNG there are certainly more prevalent 6*s in the game than others. Again, that's how RNG works. That's the info I was looking for, just a type of statistical breakdown of who is out there

This is also in part to some 6* being around for longer periods of time. For example DPX... He's been around since the beginning, so naturally more people have him than 6* Corvus. I promise you that I can completely sympathize with your original post, because I am one of those with the unfortunate bad luck on all three of my 6* pulls

I understand how hard it is to accept that odds are truly random. We have no other choice, however. Kabam has said they are completely RNG and all champs have the same drop rates.

DNA3000

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I took no offense to anything you said @BitterSteel I understand the variation due to champs being added later. However, despite the RNG there are certainly more prevalent 6*s in the game than others. Again, that's how RNG works. That's the info I was looking for, just a type of statistical breakdown of who is out there

This is a bit tricky. This gets into the technicalities of trials and polls beyond the issue of statistical randomness, but the bottom line is that it isn't always easy to generalize the results of a poll like this with the whole. If the generator is biased, then the results of the poll have a certain probability of reflecting that bias across the whole. But if the generator is non-biased, and statistically random, then subsets are not likely to represent the whole. In fact, some of the tests for randomness encapsulates the idea that subsets should not reflect the whole.

spaceoctopus

DNA3000 wrote: »

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I took no offense to anything you said @BitterSteel I understand the variation due to champs being added later. However, despite the RNG there are certainly more prevalent 6*s in the game than others. Again, that's how RNG works. That's the info I was looking for, just a type of statistical breakdown of who is out there

This is a bit tricky. This gets into the technicalities of trials and polls beyond the issue of statistical randomness, but the bottom line is that it isn't always easy to generalize the results of a poll like this with the whole. If the generator is biased, then the results of the poll have a certain probability of reflecting that bias across the whole. But if the generator is non-biased, and statistically random, then subsets are not likely to represent the whole. In fact, some of the tests for randomness encapsulates the idea that subsets should not reflect the whole.

Agree. I've seen some things like it on Reddit before, but not one for 6*s. I know it wouldn't necessarily be accurate, but it would be interesting, to me at least.

DNA3000

spaceoctopus wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I took no offense to anything you said @BitterSteel I understand the variation due to champs being added later. However, despite the RNG there are certainly more prevalent 6*s in the game than others. Again, that's how RNG works. That's the info I was looking for, just a type of statistical breakdown of who is out there

This is a bit tricky. This gets into the technicalities of trials and polls beyond the issue of statistical randomness, but the bottom line is that it isn't always easy to generalize the results of a poll like this with the whole. If the generator is biased, then the results of the poll have a certain probability of reflecting that bias across the whole. But if the generator is non-biased, and statistically random, then subsets are not likely to represent the whole. In fact, some of the tests for randomness encapsulates the idea that subsets should not reflect the whole.

Agree. I've seen some things like it on Reddit before, but not one for 6*s. I know it wouldn't necessarily be accurate, but it would be interesting, to me at least.

I think the reason we haven't seen too much of this is that 6* crystals are still a bit too infrequently opened for the poll to have sustainability. The best wide data set collection I've seen so far was the FGMC one on Reddit that included several hundred pulls. There was also the Blade featured pull. Usually, we can collect good data when everyone is opening something at roughly the same time (Blade, Cinematic) or when people can open them in batches (FGMC, PHC). But most people are opening one 6* crystal every few months at best. It is a lot harder to collect a lot of data before the thread gets pushed off the front page and no one can see it anymore.

spaceoctopus

DNA3000 wrote: »

spaceoctopus wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

spaceoctopus wrote: »

I took no offense to anything you said @BitterSteel I understand the variation due to champs being added later. However, despite the RNG there are certainly more prevalent 6*s in the game than others. Again, that's how RNG works. That's the info I was looking for, just a type of statistical breakdown of who is out there

This is a bit tricky. This gets into the technicalities of trials and polls beyond the issue of statistical randomness, but the bottom line is that it isn't always easy to generalize the results of a poll like this with the whole. If the generator is biased, then the results of the poll have a certain probability of reflecting that bias across the whole. But if the generator is non-biased, and statistically random, then subsets are not likely to represent the whole. In fact, some of the tests for randomness encapsulates the idea that subsets should not reflect the whole.

Agree. I've seen some things like it on Reddit before, but not one for 6*s. I know it wouldn't necessarily be accurate, but it would be interesting, to me at least.

I think the reason we haven't seen too much of this is that 6* crystals are still a bit too infrequently opened for the poll to have sustainability. The best wide data set collection I've seen so far was the FGMC one on Reddit that included several hundred pulls. There was also the Blade featured pull. Usually, we can collect good data when everyone is opening something at roughly the same time (Blade, Cinematic) or when people can open them in batches (FGMC, PHC). But most people are opening one 6* crystal every few months at best. It is a lot harder to collect a lot of data before the thread gets pushed off the front page and no one can see it anymore.

Great point.

DrZola

GG, Luke Cage and Kingpin with another one on the way. Make of that what you will.

Dr. Zola