EVE Search - Invention Success since Rev 2

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Science and Industry

Invention Success since Rev 2

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Tunak	Posted - 2007.06.29 16:04:00 - [1] i have done more than 200(16% success chance) invention jobs before patch and 90 after(8% success) and invention chance was changed. i dont use any meta-items only skills and decryptors.I cant say its just unlucky. --------------------------------------------------------- I think something has changed. With Max skills i've failed tons of jobs in the last week. It is really making me want to give up on invention. I don't get it. ---------------------------------------------------------- You display a fundamental lack of understanding of probability and independence then. Please go read up on it. http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/62167.html http://arnoldkling.com/apstats/coins.html http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/statistics.html Say you have a 50% chance of success. That means that each job has a 50% chance of success. If you run 200 jobs each job has a 50% chance of success. This means that all 200 jobs can succeed since each job has a _chance_ of success. This also means that all 200 jobs can fail since each job has a _chance_ of failure. It is fully possible to never succeed at an invention job, ever. Highly highly unlikely but possible.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.06.29 16:40:00 - [2] Originally by: Kaaii Since rev II, ive yet to have a sucessful run... 38 attempts. Used good/bad/no decryptors Used good/avg/no meta lvl items With max revelant skills (5/5/5) Im thinking, broken... Ok first off read my prior post. Second off I'm batting 71.428571 (repeating) success rate since Rev 2 with 4/4/4 skills, no decryptors, and what ever random metaitem I had lying around or not. Before Kali I was hovering right around 50% By your logic something has been changed for the worse since your batting 0% post Rev 2. Your logic also states that something has changed for the better since my success rate has increased. So which is it? Has the chance gone up or down?
Tunak	Posted - 2007.06.29 17:00:00 - [3] Originally by: Kaaii Id say both...depending on what you are trying for.. We are talking about apples and oranges w/o doing the exact same invention (items), yes? So, it is very possible that the items I've tried lately are not the same ones you are having sucess with, also yes? k That's possible. Let's try this on for size. You think the devs specifically Chronotis is lying to your face?
Tunak	Posted - 2007.06.29 18:52:00 - [4] That's a nice story but not really applicable. See in your story the problem is with the admins. The users can't get to their home directory so they think there is a problem and call. In this case the problem is with the users. They're making conclusions with no data. With invention there is no reason to think anything is wrong. First there was no mention in the patch notes of any change. Second a DEV posted that nothing had changed. Twice. This is a significant event in these forums. CCP is notorious for their bunker mentality. It's one thing they need to really work on. Third every single sample set that has been posted falls within normal. Go back and look at the posts after every patch. Either in this game or another. Everyone always thinks things change. Why is a %60 pre-patch success rate normal and a %40 post patch rate a stealth nerf? How do you know you weren't really lucky before the patch and %40 is closer to normal? They want the higher number. When they don't get the higher number they start crying. Even after a DEV posted twice and I posted a mathematical explination people still continues to post that it was broken. This happens in every game with every patch. For good or bad, likely bad, I decided to stand up and call these people out. I really am showing a higher success rate post patch so I would love it if these chicken littles were right. But I know they're not and at some point I'll have a streak of failures. This is how probabilty works.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.03 11:10:00 - [5] Originally by: TGR Reaper So your tell me that all of us are just having a bad last couple weeks of invention? Yes that's exactly what we're saying. You've not provided any evidence that things have changed. I, and other people, have been seeing better results than before the patch. If people are happy with invention they're not going to come to the forums and post new topics about it. People come to the forums and complain. Please read the earlier links I posted and tell me what evidence you have that invention has changed. Also please post why you think CCP Chronotis is lying.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.08 14:16:00 - [6] Originally by: TGR Reaper interesting no ships 1 run and you are having way better success than i am. thats kinda weird that i put everything into it and get nothing even with maxed skills! In no way is this interesting. This is perfectly normal. Please learn math.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.08 14:29:00 - [7] Originally by: Gangsta Boo That's somewhat encouraging. The randomizer code in this game has always been a little flaky. After 4 years I'm still getting the same agent mission 3 consecutive times. You don't understand math. Very few in this thread seem to. This is normal. If you _never_ received 3 in a row it would mean that mission distribution is _not_ random.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.10 19:01:00 - [8] Edited by: Tunak on 10/07/2007 19:02:06 Originally by: Lab Technician071548 The guy next to you could pull out 10 white balls in a row, a much less probable event, and conclude that all the balls are white or, within a certain probability boundary, his sample was unusual. A confidence interval (based on a probability, not a "factor") tells you how "good" your "answer" is or, in other words, how "close" "to" "the" "truth" "it" "is" This is nonsense. You have creative definitions of "truth" and "unusual." There's only one way 10 white balls can be considered unusual. If you the observer define it to be. If it's possible to pull 10 white balls then pulling 10 white balls is in no way unusual. Your second quote can be summed up as follows. The closer my subset of data approaches the real set of data the more accurate my sub set is. i.e. The less data I'm missing the more data I have. Really? You come up with that on your own or do you have a team of trained monkeys in the basement? Answer me this. Is it impossible to fail 50 invention jobs in a row? Why? Statistics is what you _think_ something should be. Probability is what nature _says_ it is.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.11 11:09:00 - [9] Originally by: Lab Technician071548 So, you're saying that if I get a dealt a straight flush, that's not unusual because it is possible? You are grasping at straws to try to justify the tone of your commentary. That's exactly what I'm saying. If you're playing poker and you're dealt a a straight flush that is in no way unusual. It would be unusual if I was dealt 5 of a card. I don't feel that I'm grasping at straws in any way. The tone of my commentary is that statistics are only useful after the event has happened. Any attempt to use statistics to predict future events is akin to ESP or astrology. It's impossible to use statistics to predict what side is going to end facing upward on a coin flip. A 50/50 change does not mean half the flips will end up heads. What I've been arguing against in this thread are the Chicken Little statistitions, you know who I'm talking about, claiming that because they've had x failures in a row something is broken. There's no basis for that. Especially when little to no data is provided, people have been reporting normal and increased results (bell curve?), and a DEV has posted _twice_ that nothing was changed. Oh and to get back on subject with the invention stuff. People are now looking at corp/personal/POS differences. Did any of these things factor into success before the patch? For these to matter CCP would have to intentionally code it in. Even if they did code it in they would have had to change something which they've already said they haven't.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.11 15:47:00 - [10] Originally by: Lab Technician071548 To the point of statistics being unusable to predict things, that's just silly. When's the next time you'll be dealt the afore mentioned straight flush?

Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.12 04:00:00 - [11] Originally by: Lab Technician071548 It's likely to happen sometime in the next 64,974 hands that I play. But you can't show that it will. You also can't show that it won't. If you can't prove that an event will or will not happen in a certain range then it's not prediction. All of your own examples are simply showing the frequency of an action once you have a result set. That's not prediction. Statistics are only useful after the action has happened.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.07.12 17:34:00 - [12] Originally by: Lab Technician071548 Prediction within a probability boundary is common. You're using probability to predict then not statistics.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.