Really? 3 90% failures in a row!

Discussion in 'Gotham City (General Gameplay)' started by Nichalus, Feb 9, 2018.

  1. Knarlydude Loyal Player

    My RNG calculator says you have really good or bad luck. depending on the day I guess.

    3d10 and rolling a 10 three times is 0.1% chance. :eek:

    If you were rolling 1d30 ( which is the same amount of numbers but with 1 die ) you would be at 3.33% of landing on 30. OUCH
  2. Crimson Mayhem Loyal Player

    ITT: Gambler's fallacy
    • Like x 3
  3. Xibo Loyal Player

    Probably you've seen some black cats in that day.
  4. Alrighty Then Loyal Player

    No, that's bad math. The odds of rolling a 6 die 3x in a row are 1/216. If you rolled one 6 the odds then of rolling 2 sixes in a row is 1/36; or another 6 would be 1/6. If you've rolled two sixes in a row; the odds of rolling another 6 would be 1/6. The odds are always 1/6 when rolling a die once; for a particular number to be on top.
    • Like x 2
  5. Giga Vamm Dedicated Player

    I never said the odds change on a particular roll. They change when looking at the events together. The chances of rolling a die twice provides 36 possible outcomes. Three times provides 216 possible outcomes.

    The forums don't want to format the below correctly, but here is what it comes down to:
    Roll 1 : Roll 2
    1 : 1
    1 ; 2
    1 : 3
    1 : 4
    1 : 5
    1 : 6
    2 : 1
    2 : 2
    2 : 3
    2 : 4
    2 : 5
    2 : 6
    3 : 1
    3 : 2
    3 : 3
    3 : 4
    3 : 5
    3 : 6
    4 : 1
    4 : 2
    4 : 3
    4 : 4
    4 : 5
    4 : 6
    5 : 1
    5 : 2
    5 : 3
    5 : 4
    5 : 5
    5 : 6
    6 : 1
    6 : 2
    6 : 3
    6 : 4
    6 : 5
    6 : 6

    The chances of rolling a number and then the same number again are 1/36. You can actually count the possible outcomes above and verify it.
  6. bigbadron alt Dedicated Player

    Nope. First time, the odds of failure are 10%. Second time, still 10%. Third time, 10%. Tenth time, 10%. Hundredth time... 10%. No matter how often you try, the odds don't change, and previous attempts don't make any difference to the current attempt.
    • Like x 5
  7. Giga Vamm Dedicated Player

    Okay, I guess I have made a mistake in saying odds in my previous posts. However, the probability changes with subsequent attempts. The probability of failing three times in a row is 1/1000.

    The odds against failing three times in a row would be 999 to 1, or more formally written, the odds are 1 : 999 of failure three times in a row.

    That said, you're not incorrect. Just because it's improbable doesn't make it impossible or change that the events are separate. As mentioned previously in this thread, this falls under the gambler's fallacy.
    • Like x 1
  8. velvetsanity Loyal Player

    The odds on any single roll never change. The odds of getting the same result multiple times in a row *do* change exponentially based on the number of rolls involved. The math for calculating a specific result multiple times in a row on sequential rolls is the same as if you made that many rolls simultaneously. Using the six-sided die references matter how many dice you roll, the odds of any single die coming up 6 are 1:6. The odds of any two specific dice coming up 6 simultaneously would be 1:36. The odds of any three specific dice coming up all 6’s simultaneously would be 1:216. Four dice, all 6’s...1:1296. Five dice, all 6’s...1:7776. Six dice, all 6’s...1:46,656. Etc.
    • Like x 1
  9. velvetsanity Loyal Player

    Here's the part that suckers gambling and/or TC addicts:

    (I’ll use the same six sided die analogy to keep the numbers relatively small)

    Roll three dice simultaneously. You’d think that the odds of seeing one of them turn up 6 would then be 3:6, right? To quote Jack Ryder, You Are Wrong. It changes to 3:18. Five dice, with any one of them turning up six, 5:30. Ten dice, 10:60. A hundred dice? 100:600. (Though to be honest, with a pool of possible results so small, it’s practically guaranteed that you’ll see a large number of 6’s with that many rolls. That’s the sucker play in this - systems like the lottery and TC RNG have so many possible results that the equivalent of rolling a hundred dice looking for a single 6 would take hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions or billions of tries because the pool of possible results is so huge)
    • Like x 1
  10. Shark Dental Devoted Player

    Yeah. The odds before you ever start rolling, though.

    For each individual roll, the odds are always 1/6 (of failure in this case). Or, to change the dynamic, lets apply the actual numbers we're talking about here.

    Breakthrough success of 90%. In other words, odds of 9/10 of success, 1/10 failure for each try.

    Before he ever starts ANY breakthrough, if he asks himself, what are the odds I'm going to get 3 failures in a row, they would be 1/1000.

    What are the odds when he pushes the button for his first breakthrough of success? 9/10. Darn, a failure!

    What are the odds for success when he pushes the button for his second breakthrough? 99/100? 1/100 chance of failure? Nope! Still 9/10. His past failure doesn't change or affect his present chances of winning. Oh, man, he failed again!

    What are the odds for success when he pushes the button the third time? 999/1,000? Nope! Still 9/10!

    People have this mistaken belief (almost like a security blanket) that long strings of bad results can't occur. That's only true WITH LARGE SAMPLE SIZES. If you toss heads 10 times in a row (1/1024 probability), for example, are you more likely to get tails on the 11th toss? NOOOOOO!!!!!! That's the crazy thing. You're just as likely to get another head. The odds are still 50%, because past rolls DO NOT affect present ones.

    After 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 rolls, yeah, things even out to about 50% heads and 50% tails, but with small numbers like 10 or 20 real life doesn't actually behave that way.

    This isn't a big deal, of course, I'm more explaining this because of the fact that the new 120 artifacts have a breakout of 60% and trying to prevent people from thinking, well, if I've lost 4 breakouts, number 5 has to be a win. Totally, totally, massively wrong. In practice, with 60%, you could fail 8-10 times easy.

    Anyone who has ever played Aion knows this all too well.
    • Like x 2
  11. Giga Vamm Dedicated Player

    Yep, statistically or probabilistically analyzing what happened is different than looking at it from a random processes point of view. Each event is independent. Statistically, the chances increase with each failure that the next will be a success. The event itself still has the same chance of failure, though. At some point, statistics will start to come into play. For instance, if a player had 100 failure in a row when only 10 should occur in 100 tries, that would be a pretty high indicator that there is a bug. That doesn't mean it is impossible to fail 100 times in a row, but it is astronomically unlikely.
    • Like x 2
  12. Reinheld Devil's Advocate almost nothing ran last night because after looking for this I watched most of Anchorman and Anchorman II in clips. D@mn you YouTube and your endless entertainment!

    • Like x 1