Board Thread:Game Discussion/@comment-184.58.159.118-20130905114258/@comment-11490363-20130905193007

SchappX54G wrote: Roanoke you're assuming the space bridge is coded the same for each and every player. The truth is they could easily distribute out a cyberdex scanning method or a 50/50 first pull then weight heavily towards the result on subsequent draws. They can do whatever they want. You go on thinking Mobage "means F-U-N" and doesn't specialize in extracting billions of dollars through microtransaction. Keep on telling me the data supports a 50/50 draw without actually taking any of the data presented into account. Don't even bother responding to the last sentence, because I know what your response will be: "Any voluntary data collection is going to be biased!!!!" I'm done responding to you; you seem to just enjoy seeking out argument over every topic. Actually I am not assuming anything. I suspect it is, but I don't need to assume it. The numbers would not support 50/50 if there was some code that checked your cyberdex.

Yes my assessment of the numbers is cursory, mostly just making sure there are no huge outliers, and there are none. In fact the 'oddest' result I have seen is 7 in a row, which is 1 in 64. or 1.5%. Consider the odds of getting an R4 through medals is roughly 0.1% (1 in 1000 as people seem to agree based on the reports) and people regularly report getting some because there are thousands of events to consider. Same with the bridges. 1.5% seems low but with thousands of pulls, someone will see it, maybe more than one person.

For reference, an outlier would be someone with 20 alts in a row from the same bridge. Which amounts to 1 in a million, THAT is unlikely and would raise an eyebrow if someone said it was 50/50. But 5 or 10, not that unlikely. Remember 20 alts in a row is NOT the same as no MTMs in 20 pulls across multiple bridges. so 5 alts in B1 and 6 bots in B2 and 5 bots in B3 and 4 alts in B4 is not the same.

I would love to crunch the numbers here, but with all this noise it is hard to pick out just the stats.

I could start another thread for stats only, no discussion, and I could easily cull the data and summarize it and see what the reported odds are. In that case, bias would be fine because it would be balanced if it were truly 50/50 and unbalanced if not, so that would still give us useful information. But that would require people to post their results AGAIN... I am up for it if everyone else is. I stand by my math.