Great Vault, Random? No Way

[Kaver]

It doesn't matter if the system is flawed or not. It gives items more or less randomly. It being completely random and you are unlucky or it being not fully random and you're still unlucky doesn't change anything. In the end you just were unlucky.

Doesn't it depend on the degree of how flawed it is? If there's a flaw in the system that makes you get the same item over and over, then it's not just a lack of luck anymore.

[huth]

Doesn't it depend on the degree of how flawed it is? If there's a flaw in the system that makes you get the same item over and over, then it's not just a lack of luck anymore.

Then this kind of reaction would be vastly more common. It doesn't seem to do so disproportionately often.

[Kaver]

Then this kind of reaction would be vastly more common. It doesn't seem to do so disproportionately often.

You got into the middle of longer conversation so you miss the context

My original point was simply: We cannot be certain that Blizzards random number generator isn't flawed.

[Easyclassictopkeklel]

I wonder why some people always look for some kind of conspiracy.
Just think for a second...what's more likely. That blizz spends ressources creating some weird algorythm which gives some people a higher chance to receive the "same" loot. Or blizz just using the simple solution of making the loot 100% rng.
These "theories" are around since vanilla when people claimed the weirdest methods to avoid shitty loot in MC. Human brains seem to have a problem with accepting shitty rng being still rng I guess.

[Garymorilix]

I am astounded how many people are so fucking bored with their lives that they start to come up with conspiracy theories for random loot generation.

Yes, everything is hand-tailored in this game to specifically fuck with YOU. Everyone else is having a blast laughing at your misfortune behind your back.
They specifically select 1 player out of millions each day just to fuck with. I know, my mom works at Blizzard.
Sorry it was your turn.

[Kaver]

That blizz spends ressources creating some weird algorythm

I don't think people expect Blizzard to do it on purpose. But it could be bug in the system.

- - - Updated - - -

I am astounded how many people are so fucking bored with their lives that they start to come up with conspiracy theories for random loot generation.

Yes, everything is hand-tailored in this game to specifically fuck with YOU. Everyone else is having a blast laughing at your misfortune behind your back.
They specifically select 1 player out of millions each day just to fuck with. I know, my mom works at Blizzard.
Sorry it was your turn.

I don't think people expect Blizzard to do it on purpose. But it could be bug in the system.

[Wuusah]

You got into the middle of longer conversation so you miss the context

My original point was simply: We cannot be certain that Blizzards random number generator isn't flawed.

and because we cannot be certain there is no point in throwing a fit about it.

[Garymorilix]

I don't think people expect Blizzard to do it on purpose. But it could be bug in the system.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't think people expect Blizzard to do it on purpose. But it could be bug in the system.

What bug, you precious summer child?

Please, enlighten us with your extensive knowledge about bugs in random number generation.
We're all ears.

[Kaver]

and because we cannot be certain there is no point in throwing a fit about it.

No one is throwing a fit. It's just an interesting topic. People blindly trust that rng isn't flawed, which it might be.

- - - Updated - - -

What bug, you precious summer child?

Please, enlighten us with your extensive knowledge about bugs in random number generation.
We're all ears.

I don't know. But couldn't it be flawed?

[huth]

You got into the middle of longer conversation so you miss the context

My original point was simply: We cannot be certain that Blizzards random number generator isn't flawed.

No, i didn't miss the context. That's precisely what i'm talking about. If the RNG was flawed, you would get a disproportionate number of some results. It doesn't appear to do so, so it likely isn't flawed in any way that is relevant to us.

[Garymorilix]

No one is throwing a fit. It's just an interesting topic. People blindly trust that rng isn't flawed, which it might be.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't know. But couldn't it be flawed?

Flawed how, my fucking god?
That you don't like the outcome? Too bad, it's random.

Random selection is literally the easiest shit to program.
That's literally one of the first things you learn to write when you start programming in high-school.

There are dozens of random selection/generator websites if you just type it into google.

Stop this bullshit already. No, it isn't flawed. It's just pure computer generated randomness.

[huth]

I don't know. But couldn't it be flawed?

I don't know. But couldn't you, right now, be on fire?

This is a meaningless way of thinking about things. That it is possible for it to be flawed has no bearing on whether it actually is, and as long as that flaw has no visible repercussions, it may not even be worth fixing.

[Kaver]

isn't flawed in any way that is relevant to us.

That kinda depends if you're impacted by it or not. And I would argue that any flaw in a system is relevant to some degree because it might grow.

- - - Updated - - -

No, it isn't flawed.

How do you know?

- - - Updated - - -

it may not even be worth fixing.

If it has a negative impact on people (even if it's only a small group) then it's worth fixing. Imo.

[Boddhi]

....I am sure Blizz would never let the carrot on a stick be totally random...

I'd say that's the only thing one can really be sure about at this topic.

[huth]

That kinda depends if you're impacted by it or not. And I would argue that any flaw in a system is relevant to some degree because it might grow.

Now you're the one missing the context. If it isn't flawed in a way that is relevant to us, then, by definition, we're not being negatively impacted by it.

Nor are you making a sensible argument for fixing there. Yes, it could grow. It could also shrink or disappear entirely in a later rework as a side effect. Which is why somebody who actually has access to its workings should check if it is within acceptable boundaries, but there isn't much point to doing anything about it as long as it is.

Unless your legs are crippled you could go do a running jump off a bridge. Would you consider it sensible to constantly have somebody following you around to hold you down? Or would you say that this only makes sense if there's actual reason to believe that you not only could do it, but are likely to do so?

[Kaver]

If it isn't flawed in a way that is relevant to us

When is it relevant?

[huth]

When is it relevant?

Read the full sentence. Not my problem that you don't get things when you keep ignoring 90% of what people say to you.

[Kaver]

Read the full sentence. Not my problem that you don't get things when you keep ignoring 90% of what people say to you.

The rest of your post doesn't answer that question. So when is it relevant?

[Garymorilix]

That kinda depends if you're impacted by it or not. And I would argue that any flaw in a system is relevant to some degree because it might grow.

- - - Updated - - -



How do you know?

- - - Updated - - -



If it has a negative impact on people (even if it's only a small group) then it's worth fixing. Imo.

How do you know that the government is not actually lizard people?
How do you know that pink flying unicorns don't actually exist?
How do you know that we are not living in a simulation?

I am educated.

[Kaver]

How do you know that the government is not actually lizard people?
How do you know that pink flying unicorns don't actually exist?
How do you know that we are not living in a simulation?

I am educated.

So you agree that we cannot be certain about it?