pweet wrote:Everyone who wants to talk about resist rates on uthgard should show a certificate that he has basic knowledge of statistics.
GM's posted comparison between live and uthgard showing consistent results. Still ppl don't believe it.
Hard to talk about it if talking to ppl that have no understanding of statistics.

you miss the entire point of what is being said here....

having comparable RNG to live is one thing over 10k casts/tries etc. Having a streak of 30%+ resists over 100 casts is not healthy for a game. No game runs on an actual "True RNG", its set to stay withing parameters of a certain amount of deviations, to eliminate people from having x amount of bad RNG that essentially make them go broke or unable to successfully do there activity over a longer period of time. .

I don't have a live account, and I certainly hit my bad streaks of luck crafting MP or spells etc. I never had it this bad as uthgard. The streaks were never this bad. Sure you can say you had some good luck in there too to even it out.

You might have comparable RNG to live over 1k or 10k casts. You shouldn't have roughly 30% resists rate on a lvl 47 spell over 100 casts though. The swings of a bad streak is entirely way to volatile which is unhealthy for the player . You should only be able to go so far either way and right now we are saying is these bad swings are vicious and and it doesn't have to be this way and its one of the reasons people are leaving the server/game as a result of this.

Ruckuz1983 wrote:

pweet wrote:Everyone who wants to talk about resist rates on uthgard should show a certificate that he has basic knowledge of statistics.
GM's posted comparison between live and uthgard showing consistent results. Still ppl don't believe it.
Hard to talk about it if talking to ppl that have no understanding of statistics.

you miss the entire point of what is being said here....

having comparable RNG to live is one thing over 10k casts/tries etc. Having a streak of 30%+ resists over 100 casts is not healthy for a game. No game runs on an actual "True RNG", its set to stay withing parameters of a certain amount of deviations, to eliminate people from having x amount of bad RNG that essentially make them go broke or unable to successfully do there activity over a longer period of time. .

I don't have a live account, and I certainly hit my bad streaks of luck crafting MP or spells etc. I never had it this bad as uthgard. The streaks were never this bad. Sure you can say you had some good luck in there too to even it out.

You might have comparable RNG to live over 1k or 10k casts. You shouldn't have roughly 30% resists rate on a lvl 47 spell over 100 casts though. The swings of a bad streak is entirely way to volatile which is unhealthy for the player . You should only be able to go so far either way and right now we are saying is these bad swings are vicious and and it doesn't have to be this way and its one of the reasons people are leaving the server/game as a result of this.

Problem is that nobody has provided any logs or evidence to this affect.

Lots of games run on a true RNG and live certainly does seem to, we see streaks on live in line with what you would expect from a random system (see my logs of 10000 casts on live on the other thread).

Live certainly did implement some changes over the years which affect people's perception. Namely mastery of focus and the removal of 94 and 95 quality items from crafting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ruckuz1983 show some evidence that live daoc is tweeking results from the RNG generator and you have your point.
You could do a lot of casts showing that there are no streaks of x in a row that should be observered to a certain propability by this amount of casts.
Just be sure you have a lot of nukes for that, since the propability of high streaks is very low

For the time beeing data from Lurker and Genjiro is consistent, showing that there is no problem with the RNG on Uthgard.

All is fine guys, theurgpets are livelike, so are resistrates, craft/spell rng and especially the fog.

danteafk wrote:...and especially the fog.

The weather is sometimes indeed very odd

Pseudorandom number generation... implement it and be done with this true random horsesh!t. I've said it like 10 times in multiple threads.

The RNG problem here is a reality (especially in regards to RvR resists), and any experienced DAOC vet knows it. It is hurting peoples' experiences playing here - the LAST thing that Uth needs.

Devs, stop telling us that your RNG is working as intended. We get it. In fact, we agree. The problem is that we know how true random RNG works, and we all feel the pains of its possibilities (e.g. crazy streaks). The answer isn't to defend it with Live testing - the answer is to change the currently implemented system. A flawlessly functioning $10,000 swiss watch taped to your microwave can tell you when your pizza rolls are done, but is it really the right tool for the job?

Lurker wrote:

Ruckuz1983 wrote:

pweet wrote:Everyone who wants to talk about resist rates on uthgard should show a certificate that he has basic knowledge of statistics.
GM's posted comparison between live and uthgard showing consistent results. Still ppl don't believe it.
Hard to talk about it if talking to ppl that have no understanding of statistics.

you miss the entire point of what is being said here....

having comparable RNG to live is one thing over 10k casts/tries etc. Having a streak of 30%+ resists over 100 casts is not healthy for a game. No game runs on an actual "True RNG", its set to stay withing parameters of a certain amount of deviations, to eliminate people from having x amount of bad RNG that essentially make them go broke or unable to successfully do there activity over a longer period of time. .

I don't have a live account, and I certainly hit my bad streaks of luck crafting MP or spells etc. I never had it this bad as uthgard. The streaks were never this bad. Sure you can say you had some good luck in there too to even it out.

You might have comparable RNG to live over 1k or 10k casts. You shouldn't have roughly 30% resists rate on a lvl 47 spell over 100 casts though. The swings of a bad streak is entirely way to volatile which is unhealthy for the player . You should only be able to go so far either way and right now we are saying is these bad swings are vicious and and it doesn't have to be this way and its one of the reasons people are leaving the server/game as a result of this.

Problem is that nobody has provided any logs or evidence to this affect.

Lots of games run on a true RNG and live certainly does seem to, we see streaks on live in line with what you would expect from a random system (see my logs of 10000 casts on live on the other thread).

Live certainly did implement some changes over the years which affect people's perception. Namely mastery of focus and the removal of 94 and 95 quality items from crafting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am compiling logs on mobs. I have about 1100 casts so far.

If someone can do the same test on live for 1100 casts on the same mobs (be sub rr5 dark rm) - we will have an apples to apples comparison.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

entrancementx wrote:

Lurker wrote:

Ruckuz1983 wrote:[quote="pweet"]Everyone who wants to talk about resist rates on uthgard should show a certificate that he has basic knowledge of statistics.
GM's posted comparison between live and uthgard showing consistent results. Still ppl don't believe it.
Hard to talk about it if talking to ppl that have no understanding of statistics.

you miss the entire point of what is being said here....

having comparable RNG to live is one thing over 10k casts/tries etc. Having a streak of 30%+ resists over 100 casts is not healthy for a game. No game runs on an actual "True RNG", its set to stay withing parameters of a certain amount of deviations, to eliminate people from having x amount of bad RNG that essentially make them go broke or unable to successfully do there activity over a longer period of time. .

I don't have a live account, and I certainly hit my bad streaks of luck crafting MP or spells etc. I never had it this bad as uthgard. The streaks were never this bad. Sure you can say you had some good luck in there too to even it out.

You might have comparable RNG to live over 1k or 10k casts. You shouldn't have roughly 30% resists rate on a lvl 47 spell over 100 casts though. The swings of a bad streak is entirely way to volatile which is unhealthy for the player . You should only be able to go so far either way and right now we are saying is these bad swings are vicious and and it doesn't have to be this way and its one of the reasons people are leaving the server/game as a result of this.

Problem is that nobody has provided any logs or evidence to this affect.

Lots of games run on a true RNG and live certainly does seem to, we see streaks on live in line with what you would expect from a random system (see my logs of 10000 casts on live on the other thread).

Live certainly did implement some changes over the years which affect people's perception. Namely mastery of focus and the removal of 94 and 95 quality items from crafting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am compiling logs on mobs. I have about 1100 casts so far.

If someone can do the same test on live for 1100 casts on the same mobs (be sub rr5 dark rm) - we will have an apples to apples comparison.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk[/quote]

Eeep... mobs are a bit trickey... which mobs? Are they all the same level? Do we know what level they are?

May be worth logging the results from pvp duels where you can fully replicate on either side... both level 50, no special abilities, etc, etc.

The mechanics are slightly different PvE => PvP and most complain about resists in RvR from what I have seen.
I don't have an active live account to submit data onto.

I do however have 13,000 casts of shaman lvl 45 disease logged if you can find a shaman to cast that on you 13,000 times and log the results of that?

I got a shaman I could use but I'm on hib at the moment.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

entrancementx wrote:If someone can do the same test on live for 1100 casts on the same mobs (be sub rr5 dark rm) - we will have an apples to apples comparison.

The whole point of my post above is that I don't believe Live DAOC (or any other MMO's) uses across-the-board true random RNG. I don't think this will be apples to apples.

Grunklestank wrote:

entrancementx wrote:If someone can do the same test on live for 1100 casts on the same mobs (be sub rr5 dark rm) - we will have an apples to apples comparison.

The whole point of my post above is that I don't believe Live DAOC (or any other MMO's) uses across-the-board true random RNG. I don't think this will be apples to apples.

His point is that it would be like for like in situation. Meaning discrepancies in results may indicate a difference in implementation.

I like you Grunk, but on what are you basing that belief? The 13,000 casts I did on live demonstrate results that are extremely well aligned with what you would see given a true-rng.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lurker wrote:
I like you Grunk, but on what are you basing that belief? The 13,000 casts I did on live demonstrate results that are extremely well aligned with what you would see given a true-rng.

I'm almost positive I've read where WoW and DOTA2 both, for example, use pseudorandom RNG for the exact reason everyone is crying about here - the stupid, game-breaking streaks. I guess I'll have to search and dig up some sources.

I know of your testing from the other thread, but I'm extremely leary of calling it conclusive. There are way too many people voicing concerns about RNG on Uth (compared to their experiences on Live) for this to all just be glossed over. I understand that anecdotal evidence is weak, but it should not be completely ignored.

Grunklestank wrote:...compared to their experiences on Live...

Please keep in mind that Live has +SpellLevel for years (which will reduce the spell resist chance).
As Lurker demonstrated in his tests without said +SpellLevel even the results on Live match ours.

Quite a few of the Ultima Online freeshards ended up putting in a pseudorandom system like is being talked about here.

Beforehand, you'd lose a fight because you might have missed 5-6 melee swings in a row when the enemy only needed a stiff breeze to die. People freaked out, much like we see here - and the devs on these servers saw fit to try the pseudo random system - I can't recall it's design, but I think each miss would weigh the next random number towards being a hit - it was still fairly random, but long miss or crit streaks went the way of the dodo and they truly became an event and something to talk about rather than a regular occurrence.

They realized it wasn't fun even if it was right, and they fixed it. Nobody much spoke of it after they made their changes.

Budikah wrote:Quite a few of the Ultima Online freeshards ended up putting in a pseudorandom system like is being talked about here.

Beforehand, you'd lose a fight because you might have missed 5-6 melee swings in a row when the enemy only needed a stiff breeze to die. People freaked out, much like we see here - and the devs on these servers saw fit to try the pseudo random system - I can't recall it's design, but I think each miss would weigh the next random number towards being a hit - it was still fairly random, but long miss or crit streaks went the way of the dodo and they truly became an event and something to talk about rather than a regular occurrence.

They realized it wasn't fun even if it was right, and they fixed it. Nobody much spoke of it after they made their changes.

This is exactly what I'm talking about and the kind of coding I'm referencing. I don't understand why this would be so hard to implement on Uth...???

Tbh true random RNG usage in a multiplayer game seems archaic af at this point. Even IF humans do suffer from negativity bias, it's been shown to create downright "not fun" elements over the years, and fixed in many other games. Uthgard doesn't need anymore "not fun" elements to chip away at it's already "not large" population

Grunklestank wrote:

Budikah wrote:Quite a few of the Ultima Online freeshards ended up putting in a pseudorandom system like is being talked about here.

Beforehand, you'd lose a fight because you might have missed 5-6 melee swings in a row when the enemy only needed a stiff breeze to die. People freaked out, much like we see here - and the devs on these servers saw fit to try the pseudo random system - I can't recall it's design, but I think each miss would weigh the next random number towards being a hit - it was still fairly random, but long miss or crit streaks went the way of the dodo and they truly became an event and something to talk about rather than a regular occurrence.

They realized it wasn't fun even if it was right, and they fixed it. Nobody much spoke of it after they made their changes.

This is exactly what I'm talking about and the kind of coding I'm referencing. I don't understand why this would be so hard to implement on Uth...???

Tbh true random RNG usage in a multiplayer game seems archaic af at this point. Even IF humans do suffer from negativity bias, it's been shown to create downright "not fun" elements over the years, and fixed in many other games. Uthgard doesn't need anymore "not fun" elements to chip away at it's already "not large" population

It probably isn't hard.

But it's work.
Work that needs to be done by somebody who probably disagrees with you.