Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
14
... LastLast
  1. #221
    I am Murloc! dacoolist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Austin TX
    Posts
    5,504
    When I get a chance I'll grab the vault screenshots I've had this season (just in case someone cares) - I've had 3 rings before but otherwise I've done a lot of 4 M+ runs, and I'ved had a few 2 trinket to pick from and 2 ring as well (but again I didnt unlock all it was just 2 for most of the weeks so)

  2. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    And you are evidence that no, you won't.

    Besides, this thread is only evidence that some people think it is unfair, not that it actually is.
    Its also evidence that no matter how much evidence to contrary you throw at some people they cannot see the forest for all the trees and no amount of discussion will make them believe there is a forest right in front of them.


    I now expect you to throw this back at me saying it works both ways, you would be correct so Ill leave this argument right there since like most Flat Earthers I cannot ever convince you that the Earth is not flat.

    Only way for you to ever believe me is for you to figure it out yourself .. if you ever do.

  3. #223
    Quote Originally Posted by Addiena View Post
    Its also evidence that no matter how much evidence to contrary you throw at some people they cannot see the forest for all the trees and no amount of discussion will make them believe there is a forest right in front of them.
    Come on now, you can do better. All you had to do was provide math to show the gambling instead of passive-aggressive closing lines. RNG as it is called in this game/community, is gambling of a sort. It's a flat monthly fee to play that RNG game, but it is gambling to some degree.

    Now, with regards to laws, the reason Blizzard doesn't have to call it that is because you don't pay a new fee each time you pull the lever and you don't have to pay for a lootbox for a random chance at an item. So, legally, the distinction for gambling isn't there because it doesn't fit the legal definition. But, in the pure mathematical sense, yes, you are dealing with a game of probabilities.

    Procs on items/talents/gear are percentage based chances to occur. Items dropping from a boss are percentage based chances to occur. The vault, as shown a few times in this thread, are also percentage based chances to occur.

    That said, I don't really have an objection to that. What I object to most of the time is the relatively low percentage chance. It was much higher in other expansions - and, no, I am not arguing we return to that high of a percentage again. I do argue that something in the middle would be ideal. Or, as TBC and WotLK had implemented, a badge system to buy gear when RNG sucked floppy... parts.

    Nonetheless, that discussion strays from the OP's question and is fodder for another thread (or threads).

  4. #224
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    Besides, this thread is only evidence that some people think it is unfair, not that it actually is.
    This sentiment here just honestly made me guffaw out loud.
    'The system is fair. If you don't think it's fair, we don't care. We say it is fair. So mote it be.'
    You do realize that those who deemed various game concepts unfair, corrupt and horrible already left the game because they couldn't be arsed to spend any extra effort? Did you even read the original post back in the day Billzord Inc. disabled their 'active sub graph'?
    "There are other metrics that are better indicators of the overall Blizzard business performance."
    That was the day they were actually been honest with us for the last time. They officially informed us that they no longer care about the customers' approval or happiness. They only care about business performance, and providing such an abhorrent statistics was NOT improving their business performance. So they disabled it instead of trying to fix anything in the game itself.

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by Yakut View Post
    Come on now, you can do better. All you had to do was provide math to show the gambling instead of passive-aggressive closing lines. RNG as it is called in this game/community, is gambling of a sort. It's a flat monthly fee to play that RNG game, but it is gambling to some degree.

    Now, with regards to laws, the reason Blizzard doesn't have to call it that is because you don't pay a new fee each time you pull the lever and you don't have to pay for a lootbox for a random chance at an item. So, legally, the distinction for gambling isn't there because it doesn't fit the legal definition. But, in the pure mathematical sense, yes, you are dealing with a game of probabilities.
    Games of probabilities are not always gambling though. No, you are not gambling to play the game. The game sets it's rules, it's rules include RNG drops.

    That's about as much of "gambling" as playing the cup shuffle game when someone puts the cups behind their back. Since you can't see how they shuffle the cups around, it's just a percentage chance you pick the right cup - But if you get it wrong, you didn't lose anything.

    That's a crucial part of gambling, that you are betting and potentially losing something. You literally are not by playing World of Warcraft. You are paying $15 a month to play the game, that game includes dungeons with RNG drops, but you lose absolutely nothing if you don't get the drop in those dungeons.
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I'm sorry sir, but we do not serve complimentary cheese when you bring your own whine.

  6. #226
    And speaking of the Great Vault itself: I can instantly think of a decent solution to the "bad randomness" of its drops that would most likely be greatly approved by literally every other WoW player: modify the GV by adding an option to 'focus on the armor slot' on one of the cache options, so that any player could set it to 'wrists' or 'helmet' or 'trinket' and receive a random - but slot specific! - item from the weekly Vault. And if you still want to force players to spend their life on constant M+ grinding - fine, be it your way, make it so that only the third cache option (9 bosses/10 M+s/6k honor) has this slot focus option.
    Jesus F. Christ, how hard can it possibly be to come up with such a concept? I literally thought this out of my arse in six minutes. They have an ENTIRE CORPORATION.

  7. #227
    Quote Originally Posted by paxen View Post
    Random is random, and that includes streaks. If you never see streaks, that's a good indication that something *isn't* random.

    People hate true randomness, which is why developers often implement systems like "bad luck protection", or coding it so that streaks doesn't happen.

    If you're getting unlucky and get streaks of useless items, that's a good indicator that the process truly is random.
    I read a study where they had people flip a coin 100 times and record the results and others just pick heads and tails 100 times without flipping the coin.

    And in virtually all cases it was incredibly obvious which was which because real flips was very streaky and people picking the numbers would alternate a lot because they would feel that is more random.
    Last edited by Argorwal; 2021-05-05 at 05:28 PM.

  8. #228
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Games of probabilities are not always gambling though. No, you are not gambling to play the game. The game sets it's rules, it's rules include RNG drops.

    That's about as much of "gambling" as playing the cup shuffle game when someone puts the cups behind their back. Since you can't see how they shuffle the cups around, it's just a percentage chance you pick the right cup - But if you get it wrong, you didn't lose anything.

    That's a crucial part of gambling, that you are betting and potentially losing something. You literally are not by playing World of Warcraft. You are paying $15 a month to play the game, that game includes dungeons with RNG drops, but you lose absolutely nothing if you don't get the drop in those dungeons.
    You're paying 15$ for a casino entrance ticket. Once you're inside, you start paying with your own lifetime to make those rolls. But that's not a big problem if someone is prepared to perform such payments, that's fine, that's his own personal choice.
    The problem is that the cards are rigged and all aces are removed from the deck.
    And the likes of you immediately start punching the victim once he calls out the dealer on his bullshit.

  9. #229
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Games of probabilities are not always gambling though. No, you are not gambling to play the game. The game sets it's rules, it's rules include RNG drops.

    That's about as much of "gambling" as playing the cup shuffle game when someone puts the cups behind their back. Since you can't see how they shuffle the cups around, it's just a percentage chance you pick the right cup - But if you get it wrong, you didn't lose anything.

    That's a crucial part of gambling, that you are betting and potentially losing something. You literally are not by playing World of Warcraft. You are paying $15 a month to play the game, that game includes dungeons with RNG drops, but you lose absolutely nothing if you don't get the drop in those dungeons.
    I'm not arguing it fits the legal definition of gambling - because I pointed out that it doesn't. I tend to agree with the sentiment in the sense of how people think of gambling, it doesn't fit that. In the sense of probabilities and mechanics, it can be perceived as such even if there's no loss of money. You lose something even if it isn't money: Time.

    That said, I was thinking as I read Addiena's response: Does that mean D&D is gambling? Does it mean D&D is a casino? From a roll of the dice perspective, yes. From a monetary perspective, no.

    I try to see the arguments made from multiple perspectives to see if it has truth to it - a philosophy by Aristotle. This does have some truth to it, just not the truth Addiena was hoping to illustrate and then abandon when it couldn't sustain itself for long.

  10. #230
    Quote Originally Posted by Zellas View Post
    This sentiment here just honestly made me guffaw out loud.
    'The system is fair. If you don't think it's fair, we don't care. We say it is fair. So mote it be.'
    And now find me the person that actually said that. I only said that this thread isn't evidence it is unfair, not that the system isn't.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakut View Post
    I'm not arguing it fits the legal definition of gambling - because I pointed out that it doesn't. I tend to agree with the sentiment in the sense of how people think of gambling, it doesn't fit that. In the sense of probabilities and mechanics, it can be perceived as such even if there's no loss of money. You lose something even if it isn't money: Time.

    That said, I was thinking as I read Addiena's response: Does that mean D&D is gambling? Does it mean D&D is a casino? From a roll of the dice perspective, yes. From a monetary perspective, no.

    I try to see the arguments made from multiple perspectives to see if it has truth to it - a philosophy by Aristotle. This does have some truth to it, just not the truth Addiena was hoping to illustrate and then abandon when it couldn't sustain itself for long.
    No, they are games of chance. Games of chance aren't inherently gambling. By calling it gambling, you introduce connotations that aren't fitting the situation.

  11. #231
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    And now find me the person that actually said that. I only said that this thread isn't evidence it is unfair, not that the system isn't.
    It is quite awe-inspiring just how adept you are at pointing out that "there is no evidence, I never said that, I merely implied".
    I rest my case.

  12. #232
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    No, they are games of chance. Games of chance aren't inherently gambling. By calling it gambling, you introduce connotations that aren't fitting the situation.
    Addenia called it gambling - even a casino. I was responding to that.

  13. #233
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,941
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaver View Post
    Yes that's more likely. But we cant be certain. Blizzards RNG has been bugged in the past.
    Has it? I want examples

  14. #234
    Quote Originally Posted by MrLachyG View Post
    Has it? I want examples
    Back in the days of WotLK one of my alts was literally cursed to find himself in Oculus whenever I queued him up for a random heroic.
    The mounts weren't account-wide yet, and I wanted to get that accursed drake on my main, but it never dropped. But my hunter alt had four of those stashed in the bank.
    At some point I decided to find out just how often do I get sorted to Oculus by a seemingly 'random' queue. I've spent three days by queueing up for a random heroic, waiting, accepting the invite and then instantly leaving the dungeon to wait out Deserter debuff and queue up for another heroic. I made a total of sixty (60) runs, and by then the statistics I've gathered was troubling already.
    There were 13 random heroics back then (ToC was out, but ICC was yet to be released), so the chance to be sorted in a specific one was exactly 1/13 (~7,7%).
    Out of 60 random heroic dungeon queues I was sent to Heroic Oculus 51 times. With a 7.7% chance each time. Right.

    Later that week I even wrote a post at the Billzord forum providing a bunch of screenies and an excel list I made for myself to track down every single dungeon queue.
    I received the following answer, and I quote: "We see no reason why you would not want to run through the Oculus dungeon.", and my post was locked shortly afterwards.
    Mmm-hm.

  15. #235
    Quote Originally Posted by Yakut View Post
    I'm not arguing it fits the legal definition of gambling - because I pointed out that it doesn't. I tend to agree with the sentiment in the sense of how people think of gambling, it doesn't fit that. In the sense of probabilities and mechanics, it can be perceived as such even if there's no loss of money. You lose something even if it isn't money: Time.
    In which case, all games ever are gambling because you lose time to it. That's too broad of a definition. It is restrictive for a reason, and removing that restriction adds far too many cases of potential gambling that are not so.

    That said, I was thinking as I read Addiena's response: Does that mean D&D is gambling? Does it mean D&D is a casino? From a roll of the dice perspective, yes. From a monetary perspective, no.
    Yes, it does. It also means Monopoly is gambling. It also means Sorry is gambling. It also means going to work is gambling. It also means spending time with your spouse is gambling.

    If you crack open a word's definition to fit whatever definition you need it to, then yes, red can mean blue and fish can mean four, but that still doesn't make those words make sense together in a sentence.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zellas View Post
    Back in the days of WotLK one of my alts was literally cursed to find himself in Oculus whenever I queued him up for a random heroic.
    The mounts weren't account-wide yet, and I wanted to get that accursed drake on my main, but it never dropped. But my hunter alt had four of those stashed in the bank.
    At some point I decided to find out just how often do I get sorted to Oculus by a seemingly 'random' queue. I've spent three days by queueing up for a random heroic, waiting, accepting the invite and then instantly leaving the dungeon to wait out Deserter debuff and queue up for another heroic. I made a total of sixty (60) runs, and by then the statistics I've gathered was troubling already.
    There were 13 random heroics back then (ToC was out, but ICC was yet to be released), so the chance to be sorted in a specific one was exactly 1/13 (~7,7%).
    Out of 60 random heroic dungeon queues I was sent to Heroic Oculus 51 times. With a 7.7% chance each time. Right.

    Later that week I even wrote a post at the Billzord forum providing a bunch of screenies and an excel list I made for myself to track down every single dungeon queue.
    I received the following answer, and I quote: "We see no reason why you would not want to run through the Oculus dungeon.", and my post was locked shortly afterwards.
    Mmm-hm.
    You do realize Oculus was more common in the queue because people kept getting queue'd into it and insta-leaving right?

    Like, that was a KNOWN problem, not a bug. It was the playerbase not wanting to do a long dungeon for only 4 badges for 4 bosses, when things like the ICC dungeons gave 6 for 3 bosses AND better loot.

    They added the mount so people would do the dungeon, and that fixed the "I constantly get Oculus" problem because people actually DID the dungeon in the hopes of getting the mount.

    It gets funnier, because that means every time you insta-left to wait out deserter, you were leaving some poor sap to be another victim of your own grouping problem.
    Last edited by Fleugen; 2021-05-05 at 05:49 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I'm sorry sir, but we do not serve complimentary cheese when you bring your own whine.

  16. #236
    The Undying Gehco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FEEL THE WRATH OF MY SPANNER!!
    Posts
    33,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Duroga View Post
    What kind of Coding do they use in the great vault, i don't get it.

    With my Horde monk first 3 items i got were all bracers, then 3 helmets in a row, now 3 pants
    With my Horde Paladin first 3 item i got were all bracers, then 3 times the same trinket, then 3 breastplates

    now i leveled a Alliance Paladin and today i opened my first great vault: Bracers


    What a coincidence. What are the odds?
    It is their RNG.

    My first item was a helmet. The second one was bracers, the third chest, the fourth was a weapon token, the fifth leggings and it goes on.

    Think I've had 2 bracers in a row at a point.
    Stuff can be fixed, just get enough glue or duct tape!
    Roses are red, mana is blue. Suramar Guards, Will always find you!

  17. #237
    This was never the case for my Feral main. This was never the case for my DK 'main alt'. This was never the case for my warrior alt. This only applied to my hunter, who already had a metric crapton of Oculus runs completed (and 4 extra mounts stashed for no particular purpose).

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Like, that was a KNOWN problem, not a bug.
    >Player queues for a RANDOM dungeon
    >doesn't get sorted to a RANDOM dungeon, but rather to a specific one
    >'Not A Bug'.
    Duly noted for future reference.

  18. #238
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    If you crack open a word's definition to fit whatever definition you need it to, then yes, red can mean blue and fish can mean four, but that still doesn't make those words make sense together in a sentence.
    I'm going to assume you meant "Addenia" when you said "you". Because of course I didn't try to make the argument you were responding to in my post. I asked questions. Addenia is equating WoW to a casino and gambling. Is it a valid comparison? Probably not. It's a messy analogy filled with errors.

    That said, I suspect Addenia's point was that it is a game of chance (or at least that would have been the better argument). And, should that prove correct a correct assumption on my part, Addenia should have phrased it better as such.

    There's a point where quibbling over minutia just makes for poor reading and is very distracting from the original point. It becomes a meta game of who the next person can be to one-up the previous argument - and that's not a good use of time.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zellas View Post
    This was never the case for my Feral main. This was never the case for my DK 'main alt'. This was never the case for my warrior alt. This only applied to my hunter, who already had a metric crapton of Oculus runs completed (and 4 extra mounts stashed for no particular purpose).



    >Player queues for a RANDOM dungeon
    >doesn't get sorted to a RANDOM dungeon, but rather to a specific one
    >'Not A Bug'.
    Duly noted for future reference.
    Well, it's not a bug. It might be a bad design, but it isn't a bug. The expected behavior in the case of your hunter is to receive a random dungeon. To be fair, the LFG system doesn't claim to be completely random. It only claims to place you into a group with the expected roles present in a dungeon. It is player expectation that it be completely random - but that was never the claim.

    The system is designed to fill the group when an individual leaves prior to the terms of the dungeon's completion in addition to starting a new group with a new dungeon. You could argue that you'd want both options, but we all know that it would be exploited. In the systems world, I learned something many years ago: If something can be abused, it will be abused.

    In any case, LFG and LFR are not random nor do they claim to be.

  19. #239
    Sometimes it feels like that game gives higher roll value to the higher ilvl slots. I mean when you have 12 out of 16 slots that can see a upgrade from the three vault rewards and oddly every week its those slots that you dont need that continue you drop something does seem fishy.

    Thats from the raiding side, on the M+ side it was 2 pairs of gloves back to back ontop of gloves I got from the M+ run I did in between the two and the 3rd week it was boots (which is my Leggo)

  20. #240
    High Overlord GhostlyBG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    165
    Well I am yet to loot a 226 weapon on my warrior and I've had at least 2 drops per week (on a lot of occasions 3 drops). I've already leveled 2 weapons to 220, and I've come to terms with the thought that I will not get a 226 weapon before 9.1.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •