Drop rates

Prev1
Ever since they dropped the hard nodes from 8 to 5 I am making no progress on farms. The drop rates are awful and I feel like it will take forever for some toons. It is really burning me out and I hope CG makes a change. Anyone else feel this way?

Replies

  • They won't...you just have pay the crystals to refresh.
  • Calbear949 wrote: »
    They won't...you just have pay the crystals to refresh.

    That's the thing, even when I refresh them it feels like in those 10 sims I am getting half of the shards I got when it was 8. They must have changed the drop rates. It is awful.
  • Nyanperor
    55 posts Member
    edited May 2019
    I've found it easier to focus on more simultaneous farms, rather than a single focus. The lowered attempts work well enough if you spread the focus.

    I misread. You're talking about drop rates, not the number of sims itself. It always sucks to go through bad luck with drops, but at least for me it's not been much different drop wise.
  • Drop rate is the same as has been always...33% for shards.
  • Nyanperor wrote: »
    I've found it easier to focus on more simultaneous farms, rather than a single focus. The lowered attempts work well enough if you spread the focus.

    Idk. I was spreading it around, but if I keep doing that it'll be 2020 before I get Revan
  • Well..that's why they dropped the tries...so you have to pay crystals to focus on specific toons. You can spread it around but you will not get the top characters for a while.
  • Calbear949 wrote: »
    Drop rate is the same as has been always...33% for shards.

    I call **** on that. I have been keeping track of my Bastilla results over the past week...drop has been around 15% for me.
  • Calbear949
    839 posts Member
    edited May 2019
    It has been proven time and again that the drop rate is exact the same....33%

    This is like the oldest and most often debunk myth re SWGOH but yet it never goes away.
  • Nyanperor
    55 posts Member
    edited May 2019
    over the past week...drop has been around 15% for me.

    Here's your problem. One week isn't long enough of a test.
  • Mr_Sausage
    1869 posts Member
    I’m actually saving crystals now that the number of battles has been reduced to 5.
  • panzer
    37 posts Member
    I usually don't careucj about this kind of post, but let me add some incentive as per my experience.
    I started to farm toons required for JKR in January, and I got the approximate 30% drop rate.
    Easy enough to remember, I finished all of them when DR event started (give or take a couple of days). I then started my farm on toons for DR, hoping I'll get him next time.
    I have been tracking my drop rates as far as I remember, and let me give you three examples, knowing attempts went from 8 to 5 roughly 20 days after DR event ended.

    Carth: 20 days doing 16 attempts a day, then 40 days doing 10 attempts a day. That's 720 attempts. I got 122 shards.
    That's 17% drop rate.
    Junahi: I started earlier, but not right when she became farmable, because I had more energy to spend. 35 days doing 16 attempts a day, then 40 days doing 10 attempts a day. That's 960 attempts, and I got 155 shards.
    That's 16% drop rate.
    Ordo: 60 days doing 24 attempts a day. That's 1440 attempts, I got 230 shards.
    That's 16% drop rate.

    So now, everyone can claim the drop rate has not been changed and all of this is ****, but since DR event was released and an update occurred at this point, my drop rates have significantly decreased by roughly half of what's its "supposed to be".
    Coincidence?
  • Waqui
    7507 posts Member
    SenorPompo wrote: »
    Calbear949 wrote: »
    They won't...you just have pay the crystals to refresh.

    That's the thing, even when I refresh them it feels like in those 10 sims I am getting half of the shards I got when it was 8. They must have changed the drop rates. It is awful.

    It may feel this way for you, but what are the actual droprates for whatever you are farming? Did you track them? Attempts and drops?

  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    panzer wrote: »
    I usually don't careucj about this kind of post, but let me add some incentive as per my experience.
    I started to farm toons required for JKR in January, and I got the approximate 30% drop rate.
    Easy enough to remember, I finished all of them when DR event started (give or take a couple of days). I then started my farm on toons for DR, hoping I'll get him next time.
    I have been tracking my drop rates as far as I remember, and let me give you three examples, knowing attempts went from 8 to 5 roughly 20 days after DR event ended.

    Carth: 20 days doing 16 attempts a day, then 40 days doing 10 attempts a day. That's 720 attempts. I got 122 shards.
    That's 17% drop rate.
    Junahi: I started earlier, but not right when she became farmable, because I had more energy to spend. 35 days doing 16 attempts a day, then 40 days doing 10 attempts a day. That's 960 attempts, and I got 155 shards.
    That's 16% drop rate.
    Ordo: 60 days doing 24 attempts a day. That's 1440 attempts, I got 230 shards.
    That's 16% drop rate.

    So now, everyone can claim the drop rate has not been changed and all of this is ****, but since DR event was released and an update occurred at this point, my drop rates have significantly decreased by roughly half of what's its "supposed to be".
    Coincidence?

    It may be that you have just had a bad run in that time (with the number of players it will happen to some people), but when your description of your “tracking” includes phrases like “as far as I remember” and “roughly,” it doesn’t sound like serious tracking.
  • panzer
    37 posts Member
    Whatever you think my friend.
    I have a spreadsheet tracking my drop rates since I started the game (hence as far as I can remember).
    It used to be between 30-35%, give or take 0.5%-1% discrepancy (hence roughly).
    However, drop rates decreased drastically since the update for DR. Unless I'm wrong, the game was updated right when DR event started.
    Again, I have been having 10% drop rate for Carth this week (1 shard per day doing 10 attempts), but it might just be me having a bad streak for 8 weeks straight now.
    Of course CG wouldn't even try messing up with the community... oh wait... 😂
  • J_Sk333bs
    10 posts Member
    edited May 2019
    Nyanperor wrote: »
    over the past week...drop has been around 15% for me.

    Here's your problem. One week isn't long enough of a test.

    It is a long enough data set, seeing as how they have only given a weeks notice to events in some cases. So realistically you should be able to farm a toon to 33% drop rate consistantly in a week without having to spend ridiculous amounts of money.
    Post edited by J_Sk333bs on
  • YaeVizsla
    3441 posts Member
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    It is a long enough data set, seeing as how they have only given a weeks notice to events in some cases. So realistically you should be able to farm a toon in a week without having to spend ridiculous amounts of money.
    That reasoning is literally insane. If you could farm toons in a week, we'd burn out of content real quick. And you are not entitled to every new event character the first time around.

    Yes, if you start farming when the event is announced, you will not get the event toon the first time. And that is fine. Get them next time. They are under no obligation to give you months of advanced warning.
    Still not a he.
  • J_Sk333bs
    10 posts Member
    edited May 2019
    No it shouldnt take a week to get a toon but if you pull your averages from drops over one week they should reflect more closely to the 33% they claim, and not 10% drop rates. If you take data from 10 weeks. Average each week out individually, then use all ten weeks individual averages for 1 avg. drop, rate in that sence. A week is surely enough time to pull a data set.
  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    It is a long enough data set, seeing as how they have only given a weeks notice to events in some cases. So realistically you should be able to farm a toon in a week without having to spend ridiculous amounts of money.
    That reasoning is literally insane. If you could farm toons in a week, we'd burn out of content real quick. And you are not entitled to every new event character the first time around.

    Yes, if you start farming when the event is announced, you will not get the event toon the first time. And that is fine. Get them next time. They are under no obligation to give you months of advanced warning.

    Yes, sry I change my language in that post refer back.
  • YaeVizsla
    3441 posts Member
    Still insane.

    It's a 33% drop rate. They use a fair die, not a self-correcting die. How far out they announce events has literally nothing to do with what constitutes a meaningful data set.

    Some games do use a self-correcting die to make the numbers feel more right, because humans suck at statistics. This game is not one of them, and that is fine.
    Still not a he.
  • Waqui
    7507 posts Member
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    No it shouldnt take a week to get a toon but if you pull your averages from drops over one week they should reflect more closely to the 33% they claim, and not 10% drop rates.

    That's not how probability / RNG works. The 33% drop chance is for each single battle. With only 35 battles your actual drop rate can vary greatly from those 33% - or be spot on.
  • 33% chance YaeVizsla will call you insane.
  • TVF
    24267 posts Member
    Oh it's much higher than that.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • It can be but once you have a large enough data set it should have a target average.
  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    Still insane.

    It's a 33% drop rate. They use a fair die, not a self-correcting die. How far out they announce events has literally nothing to do with what constitutes a meaningful data set.

    Some games do use a self-correcting die to make the numbers feel more right, because humans suck at statistics. This game is not one of them, and that is fine.

    Would that give you a different probability of an shard drop based on how many you do at a time for instance I have heard people say they do one at a time and avg. A higher drop rate. Is there any truth to that or would Averages no matter which way you did it would be totally random(which makes more sense with the rates not being self correcting)?
  • YaeVizsla
    3441 posts Member
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    Would that give you a different probability of an shard drop based on how many you do at a time for instance I have heard people say they do one at a time and avg. A higher drop rate. Is there any truth to that or would Averages no matter which way you did it would be totally random(which makes more sense with the rates not being self correcting)?
    Those people are called liars and ****.

    A lot of superstitions like that come about based on perception, faults in how the human brain naturally processes probabilities, jumping to irrational conclusions, and just plain not knowing how math works. The average is the same whether you do one-by-one or all at once. But you'll get more of those little gambling dopamine hits if you roll one at a time and get three hits in twelve than if you do a lump of twelve and only get three.

    That said? A self-correcting die can do a broad variety of things depending on how the self-correction mechanism is implemented that do not matter here because this game does not use a self-correcting die.
    Still not a he.
  • Lol, so elegantly phrased.
  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    Would that give you a different probability of an shard drop based on how many you do at a time for instance I have heard people say they do one at a time and avg. A higher drop rate. Is there any truth to that or would Averages no matter which way you did it would be totally random(which makes more sense with the rates not being self correcting)?
    Those people are called liars and ****.

    A lot of superstitions like that come about based on perception, faults in how the human brain naturally processes probabilities, jumping to irrational conclusions, and just plain not knowing how math works. The average is the same whether you do one-by-one or all at once. But you'll get more of those little gambling dopamine hits if you roll one at a time and get three hits in twelve than if you do a lump of twelve and only get three.

    That said? A self-correcting die can do a broad variety of things depending on how the self-correction mechanism is implemented that do not matter here because this game does not use a self-correcting die.

    I understand more clearly ty. This is how farming calculators are able to be quite accurate then, correct? If it was self correcting as you explained it you wouldn't be able to pull accurate prediction becuase the base %'s would be ever changing.?
  • YaeVizsla
    3441 posts Member
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    I understand more clearly ty. This is how farming calculators are able to be quite accurate then, correct? If it was self correcting as you explained it you wouldn't be able to pull accurate prediction becuase the base %'s would be ever changing.?
    Not exactly.

    Long term, big picture? A good self-correcting die and a fair die will average out the same, in time, letting the calculators work out the same.

    Games do a lot of things to avoid a fair die because it often feels unfair or nonrandom to our garbage monkey brains. Which method they choose can influence whether or not it can be gamed.

    If the game does long-range tracking of drops on each individual node and weights odds to skew toward a set probability so that you get the same overall drop rate over an extended period of time, you can't really game that system and it averages out the same. This requires a lot of memory, but the results "feel" more fair and accurate because the weighting makes it much less likely that you roll ten dice and get no hits, even though it also curtails lucky breaks considerably to do so. You see that 1/3 consistently on much smaller sample sizes.

    If the game does long-range tracking of drops for "shards" in general, regardless of type, that can absolutely be gamed. Do attempts singly on the nodes you care less about, then after a miss, go to the node you do care about to benefit from that self-correction.

    If the game does not do long-range tracking and just corrects within an individual set, it's easier to implement but you might be able to game that by rolling in pairs. Let's say this model has a base of 30%, and will adjust odds by 10% flat to self-correct, but only in sets rolled together. The theoretical average of two dice would be .6 shards. But if you roll in pairs, and the first die is a success, yes the second die will be a 20% chance, but you've already won. If the first die misses, then the second die has a 40% chance, still giving you a reasonable chance of coming out above average. The average result of the pair is not the theoretical .6; rather, it's .64. Those odds become reproducible, and analysis can be done on the optimal number of dice to roll together.

    Then there are the less, quasi, or nonrandom methods.

    A game can, instead of rolling for a drop, give you invisible points. A node gives you 300 invisible shard points. When you get 1000 shard points, you get a shard. You can always know exactly which attempt will give you a shard, but the average remains the same.

    Or, one can take that drop rate, and instead you get a random value between 200 and 400 shard points. The average remains unchanged, but you've reintroduced randomness. You mathematically cannot go more than 5 attempts without getting a shard, and it is likewise impossible to get a shard twice in a row. Personally, if I were to uproot the legacy code and replace the drop system, this is the version I'd use.

    There are a bunch of tricks games use to muck around with "random" events to cheat and make them feel more palatable. But the one CG chose was a fair die, which is totes valid.
    Still not a he.
  • Huatimus
    3669 posts Member
    J_Sk333bs wrote: »
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    Still insane.

    It's a 33% drop rate. They use a fair die, not a self-correcting die. How far out they announce events has literally nothing to do with what constitutes a meaningful data set.

    Some games do use a self-correcting die to make the numbers feel more right, because humans suck at statistics. This game is not one of them, and that is fine.

    Would that give you a different probability of an shard drop based on how many you do at a time for instance I have heard people say they do one at a time and avg. A higher drop rate. Is there any truth to that or would Averages no matter which way you did it would be totally random(which makes more sense with the rates not being self correcting)?

    Just sim it all in 1 shot
    b1gao2zxkevo.jpg

    Purple gear is supposed to be 20% drop rate. And people also complaining that the new gear is a paywall and has a lower drop rate. It's all RNG mate.
Sign In or Register to comment.