Mission success chance

[Ugum]

I've failed a few 93% Missions. Then I rolled a Heroic Warforged Trinket today from my Highmaul Raid Mission.

RNG can be a cruel or loving mistress.

[Deleted]

I failed 97% mission, but also I was happy with completing 79% Mythic cache one

[Janaa]

The presumption being discussed that the probability is being applied to each fight is nonsense without an official source. There's no reason to believe that the pretty animation is nothing but that, and the overall mission success is the mission quoted percentage. Having played out over 5000 missions personally, the win percentages are spot on. And no OP, haven't notice what you're suggesting. I've noticed failing 80% missions around 1 time in 5 but that's expected. A run of bad luck on a small sample group is also to be expected. Run the same numbers over hundreds or thousands of missions and you'll see it even out nicely.

[XDurionX]

I´m absolutely convinced, that the probability is applied to every fight. A 3-mob mission with 80% is more likely to fail (51.2% success rate) than one with 1 mob (80%).

[Marema]

I´m absolutely convinced, that the probability is applied to every fight. A 3-mob mission with 80% is more likely to fail (51.2% success rate) than one with 1 mob (80%).

You can be convinced all you want but a 3 follower mission with 80% means 80% success chance and not a 51.2%. The little animations are meaninless.

People fail to realize that an 80% chance to succeed still leaves 20% chance to fail. There is this thing called RNG, maybe some of you have heard of it.

[XDurionX]

You can be convinced all you want but a 3 follower mission with 80% means 80% success chance and not a 51.2%. The little animations are meaninless.

People fail to realize that an 80% chance to succeed still leaves 20% chance to fail. There is this thing called RNG, maybe some of you have heard of it.

Your guess is as good as mine, as long as we don´t have a blue post you can assume as much as you want.

[Marema]

Your guess is as good as mine, as long as we don´t have a blue post you can assume as much as you want.

It's not assuming when it's been proven as fact in at least one other thread on this forum by those math guys.

[XDurionX]

It's not assuming when it's been proven as fact in at least one other thread on this forum by those math guys.

And you can certainly link "at least one other thread" with those "math guys"? I believe in what I see until someone who knows (blue post) disproves it.

[Varabently]

Has anyone else noticed that if you don't have 100% chance that your mission more than likely fails?

I have lost count of how many times a 75 to 98% a mission has failed.

This seems to be a lot more prevalent when doing iLvl missions.

I know even with a 99% chance you can fail but I can't help feel that there is something else going on here that increases your chance of failure that the game doesn't tell you or maybe I just have terrible terrible luck.

Anyone experiencing the same thing?

What you're experiencing is several things. First, you're looking at a small sample size, so yes, you may be failing more than half of 50% missions, but on a small sample it's not anything. Second, you're probably only remembering the failures, not the successes. People do that in general, so I'm assuming you're doing this here. Thirdly, you're making the false assumption that missions have knowledge about prior missions. For example, if you flip a coin ten times and it's tails each time, you might think "well it's gotta be heads this time! It's more likely to be heads since there's been tails SO many times right?" That's quite incorrect of course. The coin (and your missions) have no knowledge of prior flips, so a "streak" of losses like you're seeing isn't uncommon. In fact, if you research randomness, it's actually quite common to see this sort of string of "bad luck."

You could also just run high % missions or 100% and never have to worry about the RNG aspect.

[Aluminum]

So RNG is usually RNG, but blizzard has screwed up in the past and it takes them awhile to find out, sometimes they even have to be called out on it for awhile first. Remember those MoP world boss mounts? Software is software, it happens to everyone.

The only real way we (as players) would get any traction on this is to get at least one of the popular garrison mod authors to add mission result logging, and some kind of opt-in to collect all those logs.

Even then, due to low opt-in (can't make the collect default or mod would get banned fast) you are going to need hundreds or thousands of players over several months to build your case enough to get blizzard to go bugtest the actual code. Its a shame because a developer could iterate the code billions of cycles and prove it in mere hours, unless its due to something harder to catch like race conditions.

But it is entirely possible to get a large enough sample size to prove to six sigma that their RNG is ReallyBroken™ and needs a fix. Even so, you will have to press your case early, often and concisely without raging or ranting, or being droned out or baited by "lawl RNG is RNG" and similar white-knighters.

[Deleted]

Welcome to the WoD RNG expansion.

[Count Zero]

So RNG is usually RNG, but blizzard has screwed up in the past and it takes them awhile to find out, sometimes they even have to be called out on it for awhile first. Remember those MoP world boss mounts? Software is software, it happens to everyone.

This is a fair point. And we'll never know how common/rare a sitch it actually is. They have STILL yet to acknowledge their screwup on those mounts.

I don't use the term lightly, but I was furious when I found out. I had spammed Sha of Anger so hard ... no less than two characters a week, each using a bonus roll, for all those weeks/months

[hulkgor]

Haven't had a relevant mission without 100% for a while now. Every follower higher than 645ilvl by now.

[Very Tired]

You can be convinced all you want but a 3 follower mission with 80% means 80% success chance and not a 51.2%. The little animations are meaninless.

People fail to realize that an 80% chance to succeed still leaves 20% chance to fail. There is this thing called RNG, maybe some of you have heard of it.

You seem to be chalking up everything to RNG while it may in fact be different. It's a common mistake on these forums. It is still possible the system doesn't operate in the way you think it does.

[Omega10]

Here are my current thoughts:

1> The % chance to succeed is for the whole mission. I have had many 50% missions with 3 followers, and am getting a LOT better than 1/8 success rate on these. It is roughly 50-50, not 1 out of 8. The animation is just for show.

2> The % chance to succeed is close to what it should be. So if it says 59%, it is on the order of 59% chance of success,

3< The RNG is more streaky than it should be. So if you have 6 missions in a row at 50% published odds of success, then the odds of getting W - W - W - L - L - L (3 wins and then 3 losses) are substantially more than 1 / 64. This accounts for the times when you fail, and fail, and fail over and over again on missions that are between 50 and 90 per cent. These seem to be balanced by the streaks where you succeed repeatedly, with the winning streaks being longer since the odds are generally > 50% for each mission.

Do these average out to EXACTLY 59% success rates on 59% missions? Who knows. I believe that higher percentage missions yield higher success rates, and that the success rates are close to the published numbers. It's just that you'll have more long winning streaks, and long losing streaks, then if it were truly random.

Summary? Assume that the published numbers are correct. They seem to be close enough anyways.