The fact that you think the driprate is 30% on the finisher salvage is your first flaw. Data so far indicate that it's probably 20%, maybe even lower. Which is similar to other high end purples and yellows.
No that's not what I said don't take my words out of context. I don't think it should balance in 22 attempts I just think the amount of times you get way lower than average are generally speaking way more frequent than their counterparts. It's my own personal experience with the game.
If that were the case, the average wouldn't be what it is. It would actually be lower than it is.
Even so, even if it truly does even out after hundreds of attempts...
This is how the average got to be what it is. If it didn't even out at the average, we would have a lower average, which of course could only be verified by sampling hundreds (or thousands of attempts) - and then once again we'd be able to say that hundreds of attempts would even things out.
Your personal experience may or may not match the average.
I've actually had great luck with these drops rates. I feel like they are way higher than usual. I average like 4x per full sim. It's the other two items that have horrific drops rates in my opinion (the mk7 drop pad and mk9 battle computer salvage).
Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers
Not... exactly. Or rather... no. Not how that works.
You cannot prove randomness. It's random. There will always be variance. There will always be outliers. You do not prove odds. You develop confidence intervals.
Given the context- rolling dice for events in the tens of percent- hundreds is a statistically significant set. Poking around at binomial calculators online, since it's been years since I've taken statistics, my 92 drops in 390 tries gives me a 99% confidence that the drop rate for finishers is somewhere in approximately the 15-30% range. As I make more attempts, that range will narrow.
Now, 16-30% is a pretty broad range. But it is still significant data, and lets us draw some meaningful conclusions. It tells us that the 10% estimate is very likely pessimism talking, not a reasonable estimate of the drop rate. It tells us the 20% estimate others have used seems fairly reasonable and perhaps even conservative.
At a thousand trials, that 99% confidence interval would be down around a 5% band. At twenty five hundred, it would a 2% band. And while you don't know what the odds are at that point, being able to say with 99% confidence that you're at this rate +/-1% is close enough for government work.
Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers
Not... exactly. Or rather... no. Not how that works.
You cannot prove randomness. It's random. There will always be variance. There will always be outliers. You do not prove odds. You develop confidence intervals.
Given the context- rolling dice for events in the tens of percent- hundreds is a statistically significant set. Poking around at binomial calculators online, since it's been years since I've taken statistics, my 92 drops in 390 tries gives me a 99% confidence that the drop rate for finishers is somewhere in approximately the 15-30% range. As I make more attempts, that range will narrow.
Now, 16-30% is a pretty broad range. But it is still significant data, and lets us draw some meaningful conclusions. It tells us that the 10% estimate is very likely pessimism talking, not a reasonable estimate of the drop rate. It tells us the 20% estimate others have used seems fairly reasonable and perhaps even conservative.
At a thousand trials, that 99% confidence interval would be down around a 5% band. At twenty five hundred, it would a 2% band. And while you don't know what the odds are at that point, being able to say with 99% confidence that you're at this rate +/-1% is close enough for government work.
But... but... but it feels like the drop rates have been lowered!
As impressive a summary as that is, this forum will simply never eradicate the tinfoil hat wearers. And the only thing consistent amongst all tinfoil hat wearers is that they never track their data beyond more than 1 day’s worth of attempts.
No amount of evidence in the world will convince those that have already made up their minds.
Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers
Not... exactly. Or rather... no. Not how that works.
You cannot prove randomness. It's random. There will always be variance. There will always be outliers. You do not prove odds. You develop confidence intervals.
Given the context- rolling dice for events in the tens of percent- hundreds is a statistically significant set. Poking around at binomial calculators online, since it's been years since I've taken statistics, my 92 drops in 390 tries gives me a 99% confidence that the drop rate for finishers is somewhere in approximately the 15-30% range. As I make more attempts, that range will narrow.
Now, 16-30% is a pretty broad range. But it is still significant data, and lets us draw some meaningful conclusions. It tells us that the 10% estimate is very likely pessimism talking, not a reasonable estimate of the drop rate. It tells us the 20% estimate others have used seems fairly reasonable and perhaps even conservative.
At a thousand trials, that 99% confidence interval would be down around a 5% band. At twenty five hundred, it would a 2% band. And while you don't know what the odds are at that point, being able to say with 99% confidence that you're at this rate +/-1% is close enough for government work.
Just ****? This game loses any amount of fun... There is one guy in my shard that has already 3 G13 toons on his DR squad and I dont even get any pieces for one G13 sub piece...
Whales man. Spend to win or bide your time. Thats the game. You will catch up.... or the meta will change. Anticipate and react is your best bet
thats why you dont do multi pulls more then 2 or 3.
Number of sims per attempt is irrelevant.
This. I never understood why people think that you get better odds by doing fewer sims. That would make no sense at all
Hurts less when you get 0/4 than it does 0/12.
If you simmed 3 at a time and got one shard each time, that's 1/3. Sticks with you that 1/3.
When you get 1/12 you get more frustrated and return to 3 at a time. That one time you get 1 shard you think to yourself "it's because I simmed 3 at a time, not 12 at a time". Because of that 1/3.
"Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen...mostly"
thats why you dont do multi pulls more then 2 or 3.
Number of sims per attempt is irrelevant.
This. I never understood why people think that you get better odds by doing fewer sims. That would make no sense at all
Hurts less when you get 0/4 than it does 0/12.
If you simmed 3 at a time and got one shard each time, that's 1/3. Sticks with you that 1/3.
When you get 1/12 you get more frustrated and return to 3 at a time. That one time you get 1 shard you think to yourself "it's because I simmed 3 at a time, not 12 at a time". Because of that 1/3.
I sure hope everyone who thinks like that got their tinfoil hat specially fitted.
Hmmm, you said the exact same thing I said with a bunch of “stuff” in between.
What I said was absolutely true and you even confirmed it in the above bolded sentence.
It’s no different than percentages in poker hands. Those percentages are derived from millions of trials, not a handful. The more trials, the more you narrow the range, we’re saying the same thing, aren’t we?
No, we did not say the same thing. For reasons you are doubling down on by going up into the millions.
Your original post:
"Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers"
This is an extremely disingenuous take.
You set an impossible goal. You set a nigh unattainable standard to achieve the impossible goal. Then you concern troll a vanishingly implausible potential failing even if you achieve the nigh unattainable standard.
That's not an accurate assessment of statistics. That's rhetoric to dismiss statistics as an accessible tool.
Fact of the matter is smaller data sets are valid ways to draw conclusions with appropriate caveats. Being able to say with 99% confidence that the drop rate on finishers is between 15 and 30 percent is meaningful, actionable data. It does not require millions of trials. And while a narrower range would be lovely and will come in time, you only ever need so much precision and an arbitrary degree of precision for all practical purposes is attainable LONG before the hundreds of thousand of trials you initially stated.
While the drop rate on omegas is low, please do not spread bad information out of sheer spite.
Even the low drop rates are appreciable and measurable over a large dataset. Saying that they're some value so low that they may as well not exist is not helpful.
I got 3 omega mats while farming the Vets recently. Assuming 1 in 3 drop rate for Vet shards that would have been around 2,000 sims for the pair of them with an omega mat drop rate around 0.1-0.2%
Ftp players who farm meta characters like cls rey revan dr obtain them around the same time the meta is changing. The one exception may be hans falcon (which couldve been had in apr for ftp players if you immediately stopped what you were doing to farm bh ships when they were made available back in nov/dec, if I remember correctly).
I assume, as a ftp player who finally 7 starred my falcon, the meta will be changing shortly. Stay tuned? Or am I way behind already
I'm FtP and I got 5* Falcon on its original pass. It was incredibly useful even then. 7*d it on the 2nd pass. It was still meta and has remained meta.
Likewise, I got Darth Revan on the 2nd pass, though it took until 3rd pass for me to get JKR. I'm all ready to go for Malak 2nd pass and Padme 2nd pass (I actually could have 5*'d her the first time, I was told, but I didn't feel like bashing my head against the wall when I still had to devote gear to my DR-acquisition squad so I wouldn't be able to get her to useful gear levels anyway). My Brood Alpha is 40+/65 right now.
I'm not saying that I have as focussed a roster as the PtW folks. Nor do I get anything on the first pass (unless its available at 5*, like Falcon). But when I do get things, they're still plenty useful and the meta hasn't completely changed by the time I get them.
Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers
Not... exactly. Or rather... no. Not how that works.
You cannot prove randomness. It's random. There will always be variance. There will always be outliers. You do not prove odds. You develop confidence intervals.
Given the context- rolling dice for events in the tens of percent- hundreds is a statistically significant set. Poking around at binomial calculators online, since it's been years since I've taken statistics, my 92 drops in 390 tries gives me a 99% confidence that the drop rate for finishers is somewhere in approximately the 15-30% range. As I make more attempts, that range will narrow.
Now, 16-30% is a pretty broad range. But it is still significant data, and lets us draw some meaningful conclusions. It tells us that the 10% estimate is very likely pessimism talking, not a reasonable estimate of the drop rate. It tells us the 20% estimate others have used seems fairly reasonable and perhaps even conservative.
At a thousand trials, that 99% confidence interval would be down around a 5% band. At twenty five hundred, it would a 2% band. And while you don't know what the odds are at that point, being able to say with 99% confidence that you're at this rate +/-1% is close enough for government work.
If you’re aggregating data, mine were hovering at around a 20% drop rate after 3 days (roughly 250 attempts for 50 pieces).
If you’re aggregating data, mine were hovering at around a 20% drop rate after 3 days (roughly 250 attempts for 50 pieces).
Nope. Just tracking my own because that's what I can specifically verify and I don't want to go through the hassle of sorting out everyone reporting in different formats or creating a standardized reporting format that everyone will ignore anyways. And if I were aggregating, I wouldn't accept approximatelies.
In regards to omegas, my personal tracking put it at less than 1%.
When I was working on Veteran Han and Veteran Chewie, I tracked my omegas gained. I stopped tracking around six hundred sims, because my omega count was two (it was getting depressing). I know that represents a small sample size, but it was enough for me personally to feel confident that it is no higher than 1% and most likely less.
In those same sims, I had gained around 200 shards for the characters. The average seemed in line with the expected drop rate I’ve seen posted online.
I went looking before I made this post, but it appears I didn’t keep the data to post here.
Hmmm, you said the exact same thing I said with a bunch of “stuff” in between.
What I said was absolutely true and you even confirmed it in the above bolded sentence.
It’s no different than percentages in poker hands. Those percentages are derived from millions of trials, not a handful. The more trials, the more you narrow the range, we’re saying the same thing, aren’t we?
No, we did not say the same thing. For reasons you are doubling down on by going up into the millions.
Your original post:
"Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers"
This is an extremely disingenuous take.
You set an impossible goal. You set a nigh unattainable standard to achieve the impossible goal. Then you concern troll a vanishingly implausible potential failing even if you achieve the nigh unattainable standard.
That's not an accurate assessment of statistics. That's rhetoric to dismiss statistics as an accessible tool.
Fact of the matter is smaller data sets are valid ways to draw conclusions with appropriate caveats. Being able to say with 99% confidence that the drop rate on finishers is between 15 and 30 percent is meaningful, actionable data. It does not require millions of trials. And while a narrower range would be lovely and will come in time, you only ever need so much precision and an arbitrary degree of precision for all practical purposes is attainable LONG before the hundreds of thousand of trials you initially stated.
Ah I see now we are not talking about the same thing and we are both correct.
You are correct that for practical purposes, namely our own personal experiences and expectations, we can assign a range of expected percent based results, based on smaller datasets.
I don't think you're fully understanding what Yae is saying or what confidence intervals are.
I'd you do fully understand then you are not explaining yourself very well.
Replies
I’m 175/672, 26%.
Number of sims per attempt is irrelevant.
If that were the case, the average wouldn't be what it is. It would actually be lower than it is.
This is how the average got to be what it is. If it didn't even out at the average, we would have a lower average, which of course could only be verified by sampling hundreds (or thousands of attempts) - and then once again we'd be able to say that hundreds of attempts would even things out.
Your personal experience may or may not match the average.
I ran 7/7/8 on geo alpha node today and got 4/4/6 shards. Everyone should sim 7 or 8 at a go! It's the absolute truth!
You cannot prove randomness. It's random. There will always be variance. There will always be outliers. You do not prove odds. You develop confidence intervals.
Given the context- rolling dice for events in the tens of percent- hundreds is a statistically significant set. Poking around at binomial calculators online, since it's been years since I've taken statistics, my 92 drops in 390 tries gives me a 99% confidence that the drop rate for finishers is somewhere in approximately the 15-30% range. As I make more attempts, that range will narrow.
Now, 16-30% is a pretty broad range. But it is still significant data, and lets us draw some meaningful conclusions. It tells us that the 10% estimate is very likely pessimism talking, not a reasonable estimate of the drop rate. It tells us the 20% estimate others have used seems fairly reasonable and perhaps even conservative.
At a thousand trials, that 99% confidence interval would be down around a 5% band. At twenty five hundred, it would a 2% band. And while you don't know what the odds are at that point, being able to say with 99% confidence that you're at this rate +/-1% is close enough for government work.
As impressive a summary as that is, this forum will simply never eradicate the tinfoil hat wearers. And the only thing consistent amongst all tinfoil hat wearers is that they never track their data beyond more than 1 day’s worth of attempts.
No amount of evidence in the world will convince those that have already made up their minds.
Mmmm stats
This. I never understood why people think that you get better odds by doing fewer sims. That would make no sense at all
Whales man. Spend to win or bide your time. Thats the game. You will catch up.... or the meta will change. Anticipate and react is your best bet
Whiskey is also good
Hurts less when you get 0/4 than it does 0/12.
If you simmed 3 at a time and got one shard each time, that's 1/3. Sticks with you that 1/3.
When you get 1/12 you get more frustrated and return to 3 at a time. That one time you get 1 shard you think to yourself "it's because I simmed 3 at a time, not 12 at a time". Because of that 1/3.
I sure hope everyone who thinks like that got their tinfoil hat specially fitted.
Your original post:
"Hundreds is not even close to figuring out averages. Hundreds of thousands is getting warmer, but will still create some outliers"
This is an extremely disingenuous take.
You set an impossible goal. You set a nigh unattainable standard to achieve the impossible goal. Then you concern troll a vanishingly implausible potential failing even if you achieve the nigh unattainable standard.
That's not an accurate assessment of statistics. That's rhetoric to dismiss statistics as an accessible tool.
Fact of the matter is smaller data sets are valid ways to draw conclusions with appropriate caveats. Being able to say with 99% confidence that the drop rate on finishers is between 15 and 30 percent is meaningful, actionable data. It does not require millions of trials. And while a narrower range would be lovely and will come in time, you only ever need so much precision and an arbitrary degree of precision for all practical purposes is attainable LONG before the hundreds of thousand of trials you initially stated.
I assume, as a ftp player who finally 7 starred my falcon, the meta will be changing shortly. Stay tuned? Or am I way behind already
Likewise, I got Darth Revan on the 2nd pass, though it took until 3rd pass for me to get JKR. I'm all ready to go for Malak 2nd pass and Padme 2nd pass (I actually could have 5*'d her the first time, I was told, but I didn't feel like bashing my head against the wall when I still had to devote gear to my DR-acquisition squad so I wouldn't be able to get her to useful gear levels anyway). My Brood Alpha is 40+/65 right now.
I'm not saying that I have as focussed a roster as the PtW folks. Nor do I get anything on the first pass (unless its available at 5*, like Falcon). But when I do get things, they're still plenty useful and the meta hasn't completely changed by the time I get them.
If you’re aggregating data, mine were hovering at around a 20% drop rate after 3 days (roughly 250 attempts for 50 pieces).
When I was working on Veteran Han and Veteran Chewie, I tracked my omegas gained. I stopped tracking around six hundred sims, because my omega count was two (it was getting depressing). I know that represents a small sample size, but it was enough for me personally to feel confident that it is no higher than 1% and most likely less.
In those same sims, I had gained around 200 shards for the characters. The average seemed in line with the expected drop rate I’ve seen posted online.
I went looking before I made this post, but it appears I didn’t keep the data to post here.
I don't think you're fully understanding what Yae is saying or what confidence intervals are.
I'd you do fully understand then you are not explaining yourself very well.