so yeah, while there is no pattern, exploits that let you revert/retry your hits are concerning, if there is one.
dat bait tho. I’m not taking it. Have a nice day y’all and listen to others when you know nothing will do you good 
3 Likes
Pretty much sums everything I tried to explain (and mostly failed) over 30+ posts. Thank you ;-; - also, sorry for the spam ;-;
1 Like
Technically no RMT was needed, since the in-game cash shop system was changed to be capable of converting cash into in-game currency.
I’m listening to how RNG works but it’s a simple exercise in logic:
If any of these rituals work then it’s not a clean 50%. This means the player is able to react within any given window to read a pattern and decide to upgrade or not accordingly.
I’m not the one giving advice about reading patterns while insisting there’s no real patterns.
50% Enhancement Chance measures the chance for each try based on the fixed values 0…49 - 50…100.
It has nothing to do with your actual success or failure rate in a small sample.
And since you’re going to answer distorting meanings again, I’m done before your post, have a nice night o/
1 Like
So these rituals are not true. Thread over then!
You should’ve never brought these up then, even more so if you already know how RNG works.
This thread should have been done with initial reply. lel.
2 Likes
Yeah when I was enlightened about RNG I saw your post and understood it way more differently.
Your Masinios xbow approves of this thread
I got what I wanted out of it
laughinganimoogirls.jpg
REEEEEE it is called a pattern because one can make a pattern out of any series of observation.
I strongly recommend this read to understand more. It’s not technical but you’ll know what I mean: http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
This will be my last post since if you read this carefully the point should be crystal clear. Let’s say RNG produces this over time, for a concrete example
1 3 5 7 9 11 9 7 5 3 1 55 68 99 70 100 91 97
and say numbers more than 50 is a success.
- you anvil during the first 6 numbers, is there a pattern? You happened to be in a laggy channel and thought “hmm lag makes it worse”
- you anvil during 11 9 7 5 3 1, is there a pattern? You happened to hit move to the roof that is less laggy to avoid the above. Then thought, “I anviled on the roof so I failed”
- But then you switched channel and hit your anvil when RNG produces 55. You note that “oh I switched channels and I passed”
- Then you started surfing channels and keep passing. You keep more notes that surfing channels gives you a success.
Q/A:
- Is there a pattern in true RNG? No. added from edit: well, yes in smaller samples, but no not as a whole. Food for thought – a neutral randomizer is only neutral if it’s also neutral about whether or not it should be neutral at any given time. If a randomizer can be picky about having no patterns, that is being adaptive rather than being really random.
- Is there a pattern in pseudo RNG, then? Yes and no. Yes from the code standpoint and no from the fact that you don’t have enough info to decrypt that pattern (need to know the seed and how often the generator has been called). This is why it’s called pseudo RNG. Let’s assume you don’t know those then it’s pretty much equivalent to true RNG.
- Is there a correlation? Yes, always. If multiple people keep track of these anvil results then the result would be skewed somehow. Is that the RNG code’s fault? No. This also happens in real life, can you alter that? correlations happen everywhere and is a real thing that comes with random systems
6 Likes
Also we as humans are mentality built to recognize patterns and attempt to rationalize them.
2 Likes
Today I crafted my 2nd aspana because I wanted to use transcend at +11, both aspanas are 0 pot and still not +11…
In the past I had golden anvils from events and at least 2 every hour with dungeon 50 farming, now it’s more like 0 after 3 hours of hunting grounds.
My first and initial statement has always been
"If these rituals work" then -negative statement about IMC and bad RNG code-
They don’t work to skew or predict the next result so said statement is false.
It’s great that I am learning more about RNG but if I did know more about it and if I am indeed confident that there’s no real way for a person to predict the next result then I shouldn’t be stupid enough to suggest any form of pattern reading or any such thing.
This entire pointless argument is all because someone jumped at the chance to defend IMC and to make me appear wrong because he already suggested an idea that the statement might be true.
1 Like
So by your words it’s impossible to get a chain of 20 numbers higher than 50 in a row?
Also, telling you to learn coding before talking about code is defending IMC?
I guess that’s what people would call a “random” on the internet.
–
And since you for w/e reason have a bias against what I say, maybe you just dislike me, I don’t know.
I’ll leave a question.
What do you think about this?
@Kihseki Do you agree with him or not?
1 Like
It’s not impossible, but you’re the one suggesting you can use gut feelings to tell if you’re in a lucky streak or not. I guess you just wanted to show off that your gut feelings worked a few times, and to show off a weapon that came out with a good roll?
All this RNG talk simply points out that you can’t reasonably determine a pattern and use it to predict the next roll. The rituals are nonsense and can only make you feel good about a pattern that already happened.
Seriously though, what part about this statement that started it all are you having such a hard time with?
They don’t work therefore what is implied is not true.
You’re attacking the part about not trusting IMC and the RNG term I admittedly misused instead of simply saying the qualifying statement is false. That’s what it means to misdirect the discussion and derail the topic.
3 Likes
Maybe pick up some topics on Random Distribution, Random Generator, LCG and such. Randomness can be designed. We just don’t know what imc did. And also, enhancement is an discrete event, success twice in a row is not 25%, as what happened before does not affect the after.
Unless what we using is biased, True randomness will always stay random, of course it depends on what distribution it uses. So just pray your ass out of RNGesus that the result is what you want.
Proof? Absence of evidence is not an evidence.