WHAT IS GOING!!! MILESTONE FAILURE

Discussion in 'War Room (Powers, Artifacts, & Builds)' started by Critical Massacre, Mar 28, 2020.

  1. not_again Dedicated Player




    Both of you are correct. Each breakthrough is a separate transaction and no transaction before it carries any weight. On the flip side you have better odds of writing a New York times best seller then having 7 breakthroughs fail at 60%.

    I think these odds are definitely buggy, but there is absolutely no way to prove it.
  2. Critical Massacre Well-Known Player

    They are either trying to drain the economy of source marks or seals, or worse they are just trying to sell seals, which is definitely messed up considering people are loosing their jobs right now.
    • Like x 1
  3. Reinheld Loyal Player

    Agreed. I hit a level 21 and 23 head mod breakthroughs last night (60 and 40% chances) and got both in 1 shot...no fails. Random is indeed random. It does suck when it goes the other way though.
    • Like x 2
  4. Reinheld Loyal Player

    When you go to Vegas (if it ever opens again), go to Roulette. They have a display behind the table that shows like 20 of the previous numbers built on that assumption. People see 5 RED numbers in a row and they bet big on BLACK. It's a 48%(or so...because of green) chance of getting either RED or BLACK, yet people think they are guaranteed a BLACK because of the previous RED ones. Guess what though, the guy who walked up at 4 RED numbers thought the same thing...probably twice now and he and you can still be wrong. Will it eventually hit BLACK? Sure, and if you have unlimited money to keep doubling your bet, you will win eventually. This is why there are table limits so you can't do just that. The betting part doesn't apply here, but the chances do. Same as you can get a 1 time breakthrough on a 10% chance, you can take 10 swings at a 90% chance. It's just really...really bad luck in that case.
  5. Critical Massacre Well-Known Player

    It’s also possible that they have readjusted the breakthrough rate after I called them out. They haven’t bothered to get on here and deny that they haven’t done it. I don’t see why it’s so hard to believe that they would do this they definitely have the power to and there’s enough testimonies on here of insane failures to justify the accusation.
  6. StealthBlue Dedicated Player

    Think about the odds you mentioned earlier for a second. Specifically the 1/128 chance of getting the same result 7 times in a row for a coin flip. That means if you had 128 people each flip a coin 7 times you would expect for 2 of them to get the same result 7 times since one person would get heads 7 times and one would get tails 7 times (assuming you got a perfect distribution of results). So to expand on this, if you had 1280 people you would expect to see 20 people get the same result 7 times in a row, and if you had 128000 people you would expect to see 2000 people get the same result 7 times in a row.

    So failing at a 60% success breakthrough seven times in a row has a 0.16% (0.4^7) chance of happening. This means for every 1000 people in game, you would expect at least 1 person to have 7 failures in a row. We don't have population numbers, but the larger the population the more people you would expect to have a similar situation and that doesn't mean anything is broken. Of course, it doesn't really mean anything is not broken either, without a statistically significant sample size its hard to tell that something isn't working right (outside of something like the Switch issue where people were failing on the 100% success breakthroughs and that has been addressed). If the devs set up tools in the game (which I would suspect they did), they would have access to the data of how many times people are failing at any given breakthrough (or how often collections/gear pieces/etc. are dropping) an could determine if something is out of line.

    Certainly raise a concern if you are having multiple failures at a high success rate breakthrough, but be aware that the RNG might be working properly and you just got unlucky. Though it would be somewhat nice if every once in a while, when there are many complaints about RNG in a specific portion of the game, we could get some feedback from the devs that they reviewed the data and whether or not the data followed probability models. It would at least ease our minds that this is being reviewed regularly, and that they would hopefully address any issues quickly.

    For reference, I've had some bad luck myself in the game (a couple of examples: no OP collection drops from Riddled with Crime during its life as end game content, and a separate thing that had a 0.000002% chance of same thing occurring 11 times in a row), so I certainly understand the frustration.
  7. bigbadron alt Dedicated Player

    Gotta love them conspiracy theories...
    • Like x 2
  8. Critical Massacre Well-Known Player

    I originally commented about it assuming it may be a bug, but no dev responded or asked me any follow up which makes me think it’s purposeful. I’m not a math guy but I can google the odds of flipping a coin, the one I mentioned is bad but I’d say the odds of mine failing with the 90s 5 times and the other guy in the 90 was way worse than the 7 failure guy at 60. The whole milestone system sucks they ought to just trash it. I don’t gamble for a reason.
    • Like x 1
  9. Critical Massacre Well-Known Player

    It’s not much of a conspiracy theory for a dev to go “hey we need to push more seals in the marketplace decrease the success rate for artifacts.”
  10. TheLorax Steadfast Player

    They don't need to ninja adjust success rates to push seals, that's what new artifacts are for. Also you're naive if you think they have time to ninja adjust anything in this game. I'm sorry you had terrible luck, it happens.
    • Like x 2
  11. StealthBlue Dedicated Player

    Finding the probability of something happening several times in a row is easy. Just multiply the probability of the event by itself for each attempt.

    Here's a quick table for a 90% success breakthrough.
    Failed on 1st attempt: 10% or 0.1 or 1 in 10 or 100,000 in 1,000,000
    Failed on 2nd: 1% or 0.01 or 1 in 100 or 10,000 in 1,000,000
    Failed on 3rd: 0.1% or 0.001 or 1 in 1,000 or 1,000 in 1,000,000
    Failed on 4th: 0.01% or 0.0001 or 1 in 10,000 or 100 in 1,000,000
    Failed on 5th: 0.001% or 0.00001 or 1 in 100,000 or 10 in 1,000,000
    Failed on 6th: 0.0001% or 0.000001 or 1 in 1,000,000
    Failed on 7th: 0.00001% or 0.0000001 or 1 in 10,000,000

    I've you get away from a 100% success rate, someone is bound to fail, even if it's a 99.999% success rate. If we have less than 10,000,000 artifacts going through 90% success breakthrough (rank 40?), and 2 or more fail 7 times in a row there would be a strong case that something is wrong with RNG in the game, but it wouldn't be a certainty as that itself would have a chance of happening. I'm not sure what sample size you would need to validate you are getting the "correct" number of 7 in a row failures at a 90% success rate, but I would guess it's at least 100,000,000.

    On your more recent post, are you implying that the listed success rate isn't actually true? So where it says it's a 90% success rate, it's actually closer to 80% or something like that? As you can see from above, they don't need to lie to have a high number of failures at a given success rate. Just simply decreasing the success rate on later breakthroughs is enough to "strongly encourage" a marketplace purchases. For example on the 5% success rate breakthrough, you would expect at least 13 failures before a breakthrough (there's a 50% chance that by the 13th you would have succeeded, and by the 32nd breakthrough ~80% of people will have succeeded, if no one used seals of completion).
  12. Reinheld Loyal Player

    Possible...yes. Probable? I doubt it. We used to hear the same thing when people used recovery kits when salvaging gear mods. Often times you'd get back the minimum Exobytes when using one...or one over that number maybe. You'd almost never see one give back the 90% or 80% exos they were max capable of. Bad luck and perception is all it was then too...as DBG made nothing by 'screwing' us on the odds for those. BTW... I'm not saying I have never had the bad run too. I failed 20 times on a 60% once and every time I swore up and down I'd just use an SOC except "this was the time". Could they be tweaking the odds? Sure, but what does it net them? Some extra sales of SOP which are already on sale? Why not tweak them when they are NOT on sale, or do it when the new artis come out and people are power leveling them? As conspiracies go, the timing on this one is off for optimum evilness.
  13. Tha Wiz New Player

    Feel like a lot of people are missing the bigger picture.... It still should not have to to take you that many tries to pass through the breakthrough, ESPECIALLY when it is a 80 or 90% chance.. It is dumb that there is even a percentage on that in the first place..

    It already takes you forever to get these arts maxed out and on top of doing all of that, you gotta farm gear, farm augments, farm new arts. You don't get enough xp, or enough catalysts in the first place and then on top of that you have percentages on breakthroughs?? I just came back to this game and this is already what I am seeing.. The fact that the broker is already over priced enough because you got idiots that did the money glitch, so it's not like you can get those out of the broker for a reasonable price either.

    So, either way to me it's a lose lose situation imo. AND if you agree with this way they are going about this game, then good for you. Keep on grinding and have fun. Not trying to take away from what other people think about the game, but this is what I am seeing as a returning player..
    • Like x 2
  14. HurricaneErrl Committed Player

    None of what you said is going to happen and has already been spoken about several times. And show me an mmo that doesnt have a meta or overpowered class/power set. There is no such thing as a perfectly balanced game. You guys all expect way too much. Powers aren't as unbalanced as people want to make it seem. People just need to actually learn them instead of copying the guy who beats them on the scoreboard. Everyone just the wants quick and easy cheese these days
  15. HurricaneErrl Committed Player

    Since I started saving and not using my nth metal, in 12 weeks of playing, mostly 1 to 2 hours a day, with a couple days of 3/4hrs put in, and even missing a few days altogether, I have enough nth metal to level 1 artifact to 200, and another to around 120. If I wait until double xp weekend I can get 3 artifacts to 200. And if I do wait I'll have even more saved. I'm saying it 12 weeks because that's how many weekly vault nth metals I have saved currently. That's actually not bad. This is an MMO afterall and these things are supposed to be a grind and not finished instantly. But if you want it now, you gotta pay for it. Nothing really wrong with that imo. Buy detectors from the broker then sell a few of the caches to get the money back and keep the rest then rinse and repeat. It builds up quick. But I do agree with people that it is a pain for those who run multiple toons

    My only real issue with artifacts is they seem to be a crutch and used by devs as fixes too much instead of actually fixing certain aspects that aren't performing the way they could be
  16. Illumin411 Dedicated Player

    I do the same with pretty much the same results. It’s weird how that works.
  17. Ryuvain Active Player

    Happened to me yesterday. 3 fails at 80%, I was fuming. Never liked the RNG part of artifacts.

    Now I'm not accusing anyone but here are some facts:
    RNG is a number that is wholly decided by them.
    There's no proof that the number we see is the true number.
    Casinos have cheated on the past, maybe even now.
    Bugs have changed some wild thing a in the past.

    I never trust a RNG number controlled by someone else.
    • Like x 1
  18. Brit Dedicated Player

    I don't believe in the conspiracy theories. It's all just random.

    My reasoning is pretty simple. Why? Why would they secretly adjust the breakthroughs to be lower than what they actively display?

    The conspiracy theorists seem to suspect that this is being done to sell more Seals. To this, I would counter with a simple observation. At which point are players most inclined to purchase a Seal? I would suspect that it directly correlates to what the breakdown chances read. When the breakdown chances are lower, and the number of catalysts are higher, the players are more inclined to purchase a Seal. And why? Because they know there is a higher chance of failure, and they know that failure consumes more catalysts.

    The development team does not make any sort of a profit on failed breakthroughs; they make profits off of purchases. Therefore, if they displayed odds which were intentionally designed to deceive the customers into thinking that the customer does NOT need a Seal because this is going to work without one, then they trick the customer into NOT buying a Seal. And when this breakthrough fails and it consumes their catalysts, sure, it annoys the player, but that failure in no way causes Dimensional Ink to profit. We don't pay Dimensional Ink per attempt; we pay per Seal. If we got tricked into not buying a Seal, then they made no money, even if the breakthrough failed multiple times.

    From a business standpoint, it just makes no sense. If the 90% breakthrough was actually a secret 30%, they would get more Seal purchases by openly displaying the 30% to make players realize the bad odds and feel pressured into buying the Seals. If any deception was going to be employed at all, it would be to falsely claim that the odds were LOWER than what they actually were, to try and trick the customers into believing they needed the Seal when they really didn't. Somewhat like the way insurance companies try to trick people into buying insurances that they don't actually need and are unlikely to ever benefit from.

    Dimensional Ink's profits come increase when the players get tricked into making purchases that they didn't need to make. They decrease if the players get tricked into NOT making purchases that they statistically should have.

    This conspiracy theory does not logically measure up. It only fits if you believe their development team is actively willing to reduce their own profits, for no other purpose than to try and annoy their customers.
  19. Reinheld Loyal Player

    While I don't believe there is a conspiracy, and that it is just good/bad luck, your rationale does not hold up. Most people apply a seal on every breakthrough because if it passes without a fail, you still have the seal. Many also buy a bunch when they are on sale, so you might have 20-30 in a stack. I keep mine in my shared bank and grab them when i'm going to pop a breakthrough...any breakthrough other than maybe a level 40 because that cat cost is less than the cost of a seal (24 source...I'd never buy one from the MP) if you lose the cats in a fail. Now if you are applying your seals for almost all breakthroughs, you would burn through your supply if the fail rate was raised (not saying it was). If your supply is gone, you will likely buy more especially with new artis coming out and there was a sale on last week, so why not stock up? Now maybe some only put a seal in if it's a 40% chance or less, but most everyone I know will put them in regardless. It's not much of a risk of losing one on the lower levels anyway....unless things were secretly changed.

    If they advertised the low percentages (again...not saying that they are not as shown), yeah people might buy seals but when they don't consume them if the success rate was actually higher, they'd just have stock for later. Granted this is all assuming SOP, not SOC, which are consumed each time. I personally won't use SOC till we get to level 140 or more where you'd have to expect some fails.
  20. Critical Massacre Well-Known Player

    I was implying a temporary change in breakthrough rate that correlated with the seals actually being on sale. You still lose 88 marks if you fail to get an artifact to 80. If it’s an alt character that can take a while to build up to. If failures happen in the short term to frustrate people while a seal is for sale then the resulting frustration would likely result in buying an abundance of seals while they were on sale to use even when the risk is low.

Share This Page