Stucon
Scholar
Ooh la la!In French roulette if the ball lands on 0 the house pays back half your stake.
Have I seen you here before? To participate in or to create forum discussions, you will need your own forum account. Register your account here!
Ooh la la!In French roulette if the ball lands on 0 the house pays back half your stake.
Ah.In French roulette if the ball lands on 0 the house pays back half your stake.
That says it all, just because in this example both cases are very slim, the fact that the difference is this big says it all.I'm bored, so can't help myself. If I'm typing ahead of you, and in an incorrect direction, oh well...
Again, trying to understand your position, and in terms of the 20d6 vs. 6d20, are you putting forth the proposition, "It is better to go for the best chance of truly heroic outcomes, regardless of how I might fare otherwise"?
Working out everything about 6d20 and 20d6 is a monumental pain (consider all the different ways to roll a 52 in either system), but I noodled out a little bit. The typically inferior 6d20 does have the advantage over the typically superior 20d6 at scoring the herculean 120...
6d20 - 0.00000156%
20d6 - 0.0000000000000274%
That's just over 57 million times higher, but is only going to happen 1 time in 64 million.
How about the odds of 118-120?
6d20 - 0.00004375%
20d6 - 0.0000000000063181%
That's nearly 7 million times higher, but is only going to happen 1 time in 2.3 million.
Somewhere the two curves are going to cross. There is some value above which you are more likely to get it with the 6d20 than with the 20d6. I don't know where it is, but I'm betting it's not that big a range, and all at a very low chance. Let's say (and I think I'm overestimating just to be generous) that's at 105, and the odds are 1 in 1000. Is it really worth it to say "in the 1 in 1000 chance that either of us rolls 105 or higher, I am likely to roll 1-15 points higher with 6d20 than with 20d6?"
Right now:Pretty sure neither of your two towns will get into the gold league. The lower one will probably not even make silver, unless the server are very different.
I guess what I want to say: Luck is not getting you into the gold league. Unless you have silly big luck.
Luck will be the deciding factor between bronze and silver.
Effort gets you bronze
Luck gets you silver
Money gets you gold
We haven't reached the end yet. I would guess all the big spending will happen in the last day or two... If it happens only in the last hour then you'll be all right.Acha close to gold without spending any diamonds, just total luck.
I would say that fits the prediction as good as can be expected:Right now:
Pala has 236 (EN2, Bronze = 208, Silver = 260)
Acha has 301 (EN3, Silver = 260), Gold = 305)
Acha close to gold without spending any diamonds, just total luck.
I would say yes, that was his idea! And also my thought, how it could work out to be. Not my goal thoughRather than blindly type further, are you suggesting that it is better to go with the 6d20, because with fewer rolls, it is easier to luckily make a 100+ damage with the 6 larger rolls than the 20 smaller rolls? I think that is the argument you are making, but before I go further, I wanted to verify that.
That is proof (and I never doubted it) that indeed extreme results are more likely on 80ies.The difference in the dice is huge, because the odds we're talking about are tiny. And, I believe are too tiny to satisfy your purpose.
You are not paying attention to the math I am describing, and the difference between dice and beacons. Despite the behavior of dice, Elvenar beacons do not have an increased heroic chance for the harder odds.That is proof (and I never doubted it) that indeed extreme results are more likely on 80ies.
Very interesting to learn the actual odds underlying roulette systems! But yes - it's precisely this knowledge, i.e. that the house will always win long-term in any kind of gambling scenario, that motivates me, non-thrill-seeker as I am, to choose a lesser-but-assured reward (assuming that it's sufficient for my needs, of course) above a greater-but-risky reward (unless only by taking a risk can my needs be met), in video games or anywhere else, and certainly in this particular game, since experience shows that my Elvenar luck is typically below average - not dismal, but definitely poor.Just to be argumentative - It's 5.2% in American roulette and it's 1.35% in French roulette.
Now I would interpret these facts you present quite a bit differentlyAnd while I know that there's no reason why my luck in any large-scale equitable (if small-scale patchy) RNG system shouldn't suddenly change to being excellent, or at least average, meaning that I may be depriving myself of an improved overall outcome by taking as few chances as I can (e.g. by choosing Event Chests according to their face value guaranteed return and excluding their chances of winning extra Currency), I'd rather have [what would be in most Events, although not this one, unfortunately] the certainty of winning what I am aiming for (the Event's Grand Prize, in this case) rather than risk losing out on one or more Set pieces (or Artifacts, etc.) by gambling on the chance of winning the full Set plus any additional possible - but not assured - reward(s).
All that said, though, and despite my [unchanged] generally anti-risk stance, I have - to my surprise - finally managed to gain the full Pilgrim's Manor Set, with 14 (!) SK currently to spare, since the last few sets of Beacons available to me while I was spending my final ~1,000 SK yesterday and today happened to represent, four times in a row, the only situation in which I've chosen the 80s or 89s during this Event (i.e. I was given undesirable [by my face-value definition] low- and mid-value Beacons (mostly 30s and 54s) with either an 80 or 89 [which is such a small SK-per-Staff cost difference that taking a chance on winning a good amount of SK from the high-value Chests was, in my opinion, justified, particularly since I would otherwise definitely fail to earn enough SK to complete the Set without paying Diamonds] - and I was, unusually, fortunate enough to win 2 x 200 and 1 x 300 extra SK from only four Beacons). Although one might think that this change in my usual degree of luck may, or even should, convince me to adopt a less cautious strategy in future, I'm still of the view that an assured (but lesser) sufficient return is preferable to a risk-based (but greater) potential return. I suppose it really comes down to the fact that I'm definitely a 'bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' person!
And this is exactly the reason why this is happening. this event would have made even you spend money on it! Just imagine how difficult it is to "convince" a person to spend money on something, they have never before spent money on! They have tried for years now and in this event they finally succeeded and you caved! I know you didn´t actually pay this time, but you were willing for the first time. It will be the same for a LOT of people out there and they may not be as lucky as you were to get away with a bit of gambling. This will probably be the most money generating event in Inno´s history! And that means it is highly unlikely they will give us more event currency next time. They are most likely still looking for that sweet spot where the event is bad enough to make people spend money to make it better, but it can´t be too bad so people completely ignore the whole thing.Had I not had such good luck, though (and I very much sympathise with any other players who have not had such a last-minute reprieve), I was [unhappily] thinking about making this the one and only occasion on which I would spend enough Diamonds to effectively buy the final Forge piece of the Set. This would be against my better judgement under most circumstances, since it's hardly a good idea to encourage a F2P game to start gating Event (or any other) rewards behind paywalls (and in the specific case of InnoGames, they're not short of a bob or two - to say the least - even without this new mission to generate even more revenue...)
I think I do, although I am not 100% sure.You are not paying attention to the math I am describing, and the difference between dice and beacons. Despite the behavior of dice, Elvenar beacons do not have an increased heroic chance for the harder odds.
Say we have 6000 SK (so I can do it in my head) Wouldn´t you agree that it is much more likely to get 60 bonus out of 60d100 than it is to get 300 bonus out of 300d20?First, let me change the dice analogy so it is mathematically closer to Elvenar beacons. To better simulate Elvenar beacon numbers, lets consider 50d20 vs 10d100. As straight dice, the larger die still has the microscopic edge on the heroic 500, this time 1x10^-20 vs 8.88*10^-66, as well as at least the next several heroic values. But Elvenar beacons don't scale across all rolls of the dice; Elvenar beacons transform the entire spectrum of rolls into a single binary outcome, bonus or no bonus. The 27 beacon is like a d20, where bonus occurs with 19 or 20, and no bonus with 1-18 (10%); the 89 beacon is like a d100, where bonus occurs with 88-100 and no bonus 1-87 (12%). Look at what we're doing with the d100. A roll of 100 is no more important than an 88; they both collapse into a single value of 'bonus'. A roll of 0 is no less important than an 87; they both collapse into a single value of 'bonus'. The peak output of 50d20 is 50 'got bonus' results, which comes from combined rolls of from 950-1000 (not all 950-998, but bear with me), while the peak output of 10d100 is 10 'got bonus' results, which come from combined rolls of 880-1000 (not all 880-989, but again bear with me). Throwing 5 100s is no longer heroic, it is democratically equivalent to throwing 5 88s, or a 90-91-92-93-94 combo; you get the same 200 bonus in all three of those circumstances.
So, as misguided as I think the strategy of striving for the highly unlikely heroic at the expense of the highly likely typical, which mathematically is possible with straight dice, it is a strategy that is not mathematically applicable with Elvenar beacons.
One really has to be careful with building mathematical models of reality, and with the portability of conclusions from one model or scenario to another.
The goal is to get into gold league based on luck and no money spent, so I will be able to tell you what x is in 1d11h.
- Are we competing to try and get above x in a single mass roll of dice, and if so, what is x? The answer depends on x?
- Are we competing to try and get in the top x% of all n players in a single mass roll of dice, and if so, what is x and n? The answer depends on x and n?
Not really a difference: in both cases you have only 2 options:I would like to point out a huge difference between the lottery and Elvenar.
With the lottery, you are faced with three options...
From there, you can make all the arguments about 'risk' and 'personal assessments' and 'aspirational chances' and 'small loss/big reward' you want.
- Don't buy a lottery ticket, keep the $10 (sorry, I is American and don't have the fancy 'e' symbol handy) - Total $10
- Buy a lottery ticket and loose - Total $0
- Buy a lottery ticket and win - Total $10,000,000
But, that doesn't transfer to the world of Elvenar quests. SK has no use if you don't play. Choosing not play the event does not leave you with the Elvenar equivalent of $10 dollars in your pocket.
No, NOT unlikely. It is a 1 in 20 chance. Same as throwing any other face number on the dice. You can have high and good though (unless you needed a different number). I hate statistics, bleagh!Roll a d20 and get a 20. Awesome, that's an unlikely high, good outcome.