Datacrons - bigger scam than it looks.

Prev1
Eyak
40 posts Member
edited July 2022
Soooo, we had info on forum that some feats are less likely to get... But how much less likely?

I've kinda tested it out with the Enduring Codex, trying to get 25% turn meter at start.

Let's assume the odds were equal, with 5 possible feats, that's 20% to get it.
I've taken 11 datacrons past level 3 (11 chances) and rerolled 9 times (each giving 2 chances - 18), that's 29, got it 0 times. Using basic propability calculations, the odds of such event are... 0.155%, yes over 99.8% probability that it shouldn't happen... And I'm not the only guy that had this situation in my guild.
So, good feats got actually much smaller probability than standard, probably 5% or smaller. You obviously can get lucky, but considering those odds are undisclosed, with nothing in-game indicating it's the way it is, we witness a perfect gambling scam. Way to go CG.

Replies

  • Yes, CG should be upfront with the odds of rolling each bonus.
  • I_JnK_I
    464 posts Member
    got it on the first try, so that means its 100% for me right?
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    They've at least been upfront that the odds are not even.
  • Kripty
    202 posts Member
    Gambling scam? Does that surprise you? Take another look at the game… everything is a gamble in this game… and the odds are never good.

    Datacons should not be thought of being different
  • crzydroid
    7254 posts Moderator
    Cue the small sample size discussions. I have four of the 25% tm ones, out of only 8 total leveled datacrons for this set. Some were rerolls, but I don't have anywhere near your 29 chances. Come back with some actual large scale data across multiple players, and maybe there's a discussion.
  • RTS
    682 posts Member
    I have 7 of the 25% TM datacrons, I can’t even use that many lol.

    This thread is just stupid.
  • DMG_SW
    215 posts Member
    Just checked mine and I have 6 on 29 (I think) rolls. So basically 20%.
  • Recurve
    97 posts Member
    Yes I also had 9 Datacrons, rerolled each one twice and hit the 25% TM once out of those 27 rolls. Next one got I rerolled twice but did get it, so out of 30 attempts I got it twice.
  • Muddcat
    16 posts Member
    Screw CG. We cultivate rosters for years just to have them destroyed by a cash grab. I’m done. See how long it lives with just whales. Whomever runs CH strategy would be out of a job with this logic ANYWHERE else
  • Eyak
    40 posts Member
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Cue the small sample size discussions. I have four of the 25% tm ones, out of only 8 total leveled datacrons for this set. Some were rerolls, but I don't have anywhere near your 29 chances. Come back with some actual large scale data across multiple players, and maybe there's a discussion.

    Discussion? I have 0 interest in gathering data or putting real effort toward this low effort cashgrab called datacrons. My point is simple - I want to see the bloody odds in game. If a feat is 5% (and that's kinda reasonable for that outcome), I want to see it's 5%.
    Not a vague "some are more likely".
    Currently it looks like you can just reroll several times and get what you want, which isn't true due to big disproportions in odds, add increasing reroll cost - you can waste a ton of resources to get nothing.

    ecdfrzmrx749.jpg
  • RTS
    682 posts Member
    Can someone explain to me why Datacrons are such a “cash grab” when I can get 7 of the most powerful level 3s and I spent $0?
  • Rath_Tarr
    4944 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    They've at least been upfront that the odds are not even.
    Do you have a link to that?
  • Eyak
    40 posts Member
    RTS wrote: »
    Can someone explain to me why Datacrons are such a “cash grab” when I can get 7 of the most powerful level 3s and I spent $0?

    You were lucky this time, you won't be next time.
    I've already faced people in GAC that spent hundreds of $ on datacrons.
    It is an infinite (+ temporary) resource sink, bringing more RNG into power level and more RNG into fights... And be honest, you can't be so naive to think it's not made to generate cash, with much lower dev work cost than introducing anything valuable into game, so they could focus on that funny looking LotR game.
  • Jacgul
    213 posts Member
    Any product, like a mobile game for example, is made to generate cash.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    They've at least been upfront that the odds are not even.
    Do you have a link to that?

    From datacron q/a. Such a major thing not being involved in the announcement is upto anyone's guess.

    05juee8z8o4z.png
  • RTS
    682 posts Member
    edited July 2022
    Eyak wrote: »
    RTS wrote: »
    Can someone explain to me why Datacrons are such a “cash grab” when I can get 7 of the most powerful level 3s and I spent $0?

    You were lucky this time, you won't be next time.
    I've already faced people in GAC that spent hundreds of $ on datacrons.
    It is an infinite (+ temporary) resource sink, bringing more RNG into power level and more RNG into fights... And be honest, you can't be so naive to think it's not made to generate cash, with much lower dev work cost than introducing anything valuable into game, so they could focus on that funny looking LotR game.

    I mean...of course it's brought into the game to generate money - the entire game exists to create money. I'm not sure why people have such an issue with this concept?

    If you're facing people that have spent hundreds on datacrons then you're almost certainly in the top half of K1- so I'm not quite sure where you'd get the idea that most of those people haven't been spending hundreds/thousands of dollars on gear/mods etc that already give them an edge over most people?

    And if you're not in the top of K1 then you are - almost certainly - not facing people that have spent hundreds of dollars on Datacrons.



    Edited to add: I'm not lucky, I worked hard for those datacrons. I refreshed Conquest numerous times a day - basically went through the hundred crystal refreshes to make sure I got what I needed; that's how it works in resource management games.

    I'm going harder these first 3 seasons because while I'm spending more resources NOW, I'm going to start getting them back in Set4 when the materials from Set1 are refunded (hopefully in the same ration) and allow me to have a head start on Set4.

    But, again - you don't have to spend money on Datacrons, especially with the changes they made for this set - you can get 2 level 9s without spending any money fairly easily.
  • Eyak
    40 posts Member
    RTS wrote: »
    I mean...of course it's brought into the game to generate money - the entire game exists to create money. I'm not sure why people have such an issue with this concept?

    Read the entire sentence again, and again, and again, till you understand it. I don't have any problems with games trying to generate money, I have a problem with the WAY they try to do it nowadays.

  • crzydroid
    7254 posts Moderator
    Eyak wrote: »
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Cue the small sample size discussions. I have four of the 25% tm ones, out of only 8 total leveled datacrons for this set. Some were rerolls, but I don't have anywhere near your 29 chances. Come back with some actual large scale data across multiple players, and maybe there's a discussion.

    Discussion? I have 0 interest in gathering data or putting real effort toward this low effort cashgrab called datacrons. My point is simple - I want to see the bloody odds in game. If a feat is 5% (and that's kinda reasonable for that outcome), I want to see it's 5%.
    Not a vague "some are more likely".
    Currently it looks like you can just reroll several times and get what you want, which isn't true due to big disproportions in odds, add increasing reroll cost - you can waste a ton of resources to get nothing.

    ecdfrzmrx749.jpg

    So you want to see the rate but not collect the data? You want odds to fix themselves to a certain amount on small random runs? That's not how probability works. You had bad rng, plain and simple. It happens. It's not evidence of some conspiracy.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Eyak wrote: »
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Cue the small sample size discussions. I have four of the 25% tm ones, out of only 8 total leveled datacrons for this set. Some were rerolls, but I don't have anywhere near your 29 chances. Come back with some actual large scale data across multiple players, and maybe there's a discussion.

    Discussion? I have 0 interest in gathering data or putting real effort toward this low effort cashgrab called datacrons. My point is simple - I want to see the bloody odds in game. If a feat is 5% (and that's kinda reasonable for that outcome), I want to see it's 5%.
    Not a vague "some are more likely".
    Currently it looks like you can just reroll several times and get what you want, which isn't true due to big disproportions in odds, add increasing reroll cost - you can waste a ton of resources to get nothing.

    ecdfrzmrx749.jpg

    So you want to see the rate but not collect the data? You want odds to fix themselves to a certain amount on small random runs? That's not how probability works. You had bad rng, plain and simple. It happens. It's not evidence of some conspiracy.

    How do you gather he had bad rng when you don't know the rates? If cg hadn't said otherwise, we would need to prove that the odds are not even with samples, but since we know that's not the case nothing needs to be proven.
  • crzydroid
    7254 posts Moderator
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Eyak wrote: »
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Cue the small sample size discussions. I have four of the 25% tm ones, out of only 8 total leveled datacrons for this set. Some were rerolls, but I don't have anywhere near your 29 chances. Come back with some actual large scale data across multiple players, and maybe there's a discussion.

    Discussion? I have 0 interest in gathering data or putting real effort toward this low effort cashgrab called datacrons. My point is simple - I want to see the bloody odds in game. If a feat is 5% (and that's kinda reasonable for that outcome), I want to see it's 5%.
    Not a vague "some are more likely".
    Currently it looks like you can just reroll several times and get what you want, which isn't true due to big disproportions in odds, add increasing reroll cost - you can waste a ton of resources to get nothing.

    ecdfrzmrx749.jpg

    So you want to see the rate but not collect the data? You want odds to fix themselves to a certain amount on small random runs? That's not how probability works. You had bad rng, plain and simple. It happens. It's not evidence of some conspiracy.

    How do you gather he had bad rng when you don't know the rates? If cg hadn't said otherwise, we would need to prove that the odds are not even with samples, but since we know that's not the case nothing needs to be proven.

    Fair enough point, but no one knows the rates. I've shown that half of my datacrons have the one he's talking about. That's probably good rng, but if the population rates are really as low as OP's claim, then 50% seems astronomically good. I don't think it unreasonable to assume the drop chance is somewhere inbetween.
  • Eyak
    40 posts Member
    edited July 2022
    crzydroid wrote: »
    So you want to see the rate but not collect the data? You want odds to fix themselves to a certain amount on small random runs? That's not how probability works. You had bad rng, plain and simple. It happens. It's not evidence of some conspiracy.

    I want to see the rates provided IN-GAME, same as with packs. Not a 1 sentence mention in QA, with no data. If the odds would be slightly smaller for some feats, that wouldn't be a problem, but the disparities are quite big.
    I wasn't calculating odds for getting that feat, that would require a big sample size. On small sample I can just calculate the odds of event with test % and you can do it quite accurately, based on that you can make an estimate (that obviously will be prone to error).
    I can even make it more accurate with excluding repetitions in rerolls, 5% gives around 1 to 6 chance (of not getting it in 29 tries), 10% gives 1 to 50 chance, 20% gives 1 to 10000 chance, that's why I can say 5% around is plausible and most likely, and I have 1 to 50 odds of being mistaken.
    Yet my main point is - odds NEED to be written next to every feat, so the people would know what gamble they are taking, with what chances of getting what they want.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    crzydroid wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Eyak wrote: »
    crzydroid wrote: »
    Cue the small sample size discussions. I have four of the 25% tm ones, out of only 8 total leveled datacrons for this set. Some were rerolls, but I don't have anywhere near your 29 chances. Come back with some actual large scale data across multiple players, and maybe there's a discussion.

    Discussion? I have 0 interest in gathering data or putting real effort toward this low effort cashgrab called datacrons. My point is simple - I want to see the bloody odds in game. If a feat is 5% (and that's kinda reasonable for that outcome), I want to see it's 5%.
    Not a vague "some are more likely".
    Currently it looks like you can just reroll several times and get what you want, which isn't true due to big disproportions in odds, add increasing reroll cost - you can waste a ton of resources to get nothing.

    ecdfrzmrx749.jpg

    So you want to see the rate but not collect the data? You want odds to fix themselves to a certain amount on small random runs? That's not how probability works. You had bad rng, plain and simple. It happens. It's not evidence of some conspiracy.

    How do you gather he had bad rng when you don't know the rates? If cg hadn't said otherwise, we would need to prove that the odds are not even with samples, but since we know that's not the case nothing needs to be proven.

    Fair enough point, but no one knows the rates. I've shown that half of my datacrons have the one he's talking about. That's probably good rng, but if the population rates are really as low as OP's claim, then 50% seems astronomically good. I don't think it unreasonable to assume the drop chance is somewhere inbetween.

    Yes, getting the op ones with few alterations is very good luck. Op didn't make a claim on any droprate, he just shared his own samples. Probably didn't know of the -not directly announced- uneven chances of each either.
  • Opens game to immediate popup "WoUlD yOU LiKE tHIs DAtAcRaP PacK for $30"

    No

    another pop-up"HoW BoUT thIs One for $50?"

    For God sakes no.

    Can't wait for this experiment to end...
  • I_JnK_I
    464 posts Member
    DashRendar wrote: »
    Opens game to immediate popup "WoUlD yOU LiKE tHIs DAtAcRaP PacK for $30"

    No

    another pop-up"HoW BoUT thIs One for $50?"

    For God sakes no.

    Can't wait for this experiment to end...

    But the other cash packs are good or what you tryin to say? They all suck. All of them.
  • RTS
    682 posts Member
    Eyak wrote: »
    RTS wrote: »
    I mean...of course it's brought into the game to generate money - the entire game exists to create money. I'm not sure why people have such an issue with this concept?

    Read the entire sentence again, and again, and again, till you understand it. I don't have any problems with games trying to generate money, I have a problem with the WAY they try to do it nowadays.

    I read it just fine - you didn't specify that anywhere, unless it's the "temporary" whining?

    You're also ranting about them focusing on LOTR, despite that being an entirely different team and having 0 impact on this game.

    Seriously turn off Ahnald, stay off Reddit, and apply some logic.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    RTS wrote: »
    Eyak wrote: »
    RTS wrote: »
    I mean...of course it's brought into the game to generate money - the entire game exists to create money. I'm not sure why people have such an issue with this concept?

    Read the entire sentence again, and again, and again, till you understand it. I don't have any problems with games trying to generate money, I have a problem with the WAY they try to do it nowadays.

    I read it just fine - you didn't specify that anywhere, unless it's the "temporary" whining?

    You're also ranting about them focusing on LOTR, despite that being an entirely different team and having 0 impact on this game.

    Seriously turn off Ahnald, stay off Reddit, and apply some logic.

    Where did you learn about the seperate team bit? Not a rhetorical question.
  • Obligatory

    05qvt5wiiifg.gif

    Unless you're spending money, the bad RNG can be annoying, but at least it's temporary. Also non spenders are probably in K2 and below and almost never will be matched against someone paying to reroll ad nauseam for perfect DCs, so not really a huge deal IMHO.

    I still hate them.
  • RTS
    682 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    RTS wrote: »
    Eyak wrote: »
    RTS wrote: »
    I mean...of course it's brought into the game to generate money - the entire game exists to create money. I'm not sure why people have such an issue with this concept?

    Read the entire sentence again, and again, and again, till you understand it. I don't have any problems with games trying to generate money, I have a problem with the WAY they try to do it nowadays.

    I read it just fine - you didn't specify that anywhere, unless it's the "temporary" whining?

    You're also ranting about them focusing on LOTR, despite that being an entirely different team and having 0 impact on this game.

    Seriously turn off Ahnald, stay off Reddit, and apply some logic.

    Where did you learn about the seperate team bit? Not a rhetorical question.

    Well for starters It's common sense - you don't have developers working on multiple games like that - each game is multiple full-time jobs, this isn't something you can split your time between from a development standpoint. It's also not like they just started working on this this year.

    But, there were hirings of a team a while back, and (most importantly) they've said it somewhere in an announcement.
Sign In or Register to comment.