spaceoctopus wrote: » Zee_Reborn wrote: » Roll a die 60 times and see if you get 10 of each number. Yeah... that's called RNG. That's not what I'm referring to. If that were truly the case, then sometimes on various crystals we'd see the majority pull be a top champ. Been playing almost four years and I've never seen that. Cinematic majority? Iron Patriot. Current featured majority, Vulture. But that's not my point here, I just truly want to know what 6*s are mostly out there.
Zee_Reborn wrote: » Roll a die 60 times and see if you get 10 of each number. Yeah... that's called RNG.
DNA3000 wrote: » spaceoctopus wrote: » Zee_Reborn wrote: » Roll a die 60 times and see if you get 10 of each number. Yeah... that's called RNG. That's not what I'm referring to. If that were truly the case, then sometimes on various crystals we'd see the majority pull be a top champ. Been playing almost four years and I've never seen that. Cinematic majority? Iron Patriot. Current featured majority, Vulture. But that's not my point here, I just truly want to know what 6*s are mostly out there. Sorry, but this is once again another example of confirmation bias: people only remember what they want to remember. You remember people saying that IP was the most common drop that was reported out of the Cinematic crystal. However, you don't remember multiple people stating that was false. And in fact, as of the last time I checked and recorded the poll thread results, the top reported pull was Stark Enhanced Spiderman. The *second* highest reported pull was Iron Man Infinity War. Iron Patriot was third. And in fact, at no time was Iron Patriot the single most reported drop: it was tied for the top spot very early on, but it was quickly surpassed by Sparky, and then IMIW. It was trading third with Wasp at the end. You've seen the top pull be a top champ lots of times, because its happened lots of times. You just don't remember any of them, or remember them incorrectly. In any case, my 6* pulls to date have been Nebula, Loki, Loki, and Sabretooth in that order.
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.
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.
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.
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.
spaceoctopus wrote: » 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 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
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.
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.
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.