Amazing Item Find Career Start

[Drixx]

For reference, there are a lot of items I didn't pick up merely because I thought for sure I'd already picked up 3 for the stash for the giveaway in my tourney. When I ran the flavie report, I realized some very common items I'd let rot from the word go, and have since picked some of them up.

I've vendor'd probably 15-20 cathan's rings, and left countless items rot on the ground that I had already picked up 3-6 of for the giveaway.

I also got 2 stormshields in the first 900 runs of hell meph. The drop chance at my MF % (376) is 1:1075. I've more than twice beat the odds. Skullder's ire is 1:1543, and I found two of those as well. One of them was Ethereal (not sure how much more rare that makes it).

Nobody would consider me exceptionally lucky I don't believe. This guy had a decently good streak. If I had not taken the time to record each and every single run result on notepad as well as use the click each time it dies counter (Required alt-tabbing after each run), I could likely have done almost 2x as many runs as I did in the something like 19 hours I've invested in MFing that you see in my earlier flavie report.

And that is over the period of 3 weeks, most of it coming on 10 days spread through that time that I actually worked on it.

What's my point? We, as a forum, need to re-evaluate our standards and what will cause us to outright accuse someone. I agree that sometimes it's warranted. I think; however, that we are just outright unfriendly to people sometimes who don't deserve it.

That's my $2700.02.

Ooh look! A dead horse! Let me go beat it! <--- Yes I'm self depreciative sometimes too!

 

[Gabriel74]

<--- Yes I'm self depreciative sometimes too!

You make yourself depreciate?:flowers:

 

[Rizzo]

Who are you talking about? Are you referring to people flaming Kedali? or Noodle?

I still don't understnad the holier than thou attitude that makes people post saying "quit posting".

In what way does this thread bring shame?

I don't know who your question was addressed to, but if it was to me, then I'm not adressing the people flaming Noodle or Kedali. I'm asking for people to not keep on posting in this thread because it will not bring closure to anything. Imho the thread shouldn't have been made, as there are other and better means of action in cases like this.

People complain alot about bad attitude these days, so why try to put out the flames with gasoline?

And the case is clearly not solved, as people keep posting useless posts in here. Just look at this fine post for example (#43) :tongue: It has nothing to do with what is actually on topic.

 

[Gabriel74]

question was directed at Arreat.

And with Noodle apologizing, I think there was closure.

 

[Rizzo]

And with Noodle apologizing, I think there was closure.

Exactly. So why did people keep posting?

 

[FlimFlan]

Eh? Either I'm completely missing your point, or you may not fully understand the exact definitions of what you're talking about. Statistics are not theoretical numbers pulled out of thin air; they are based on "hard data". Just because they don't always predict exactly what the results of a series of events will be doesn't mean they aren't based on real data. If you were to record that, in a certain year, it rained 14 days in March, then you could say that it doesn't necessarily mean it will probably rain 14 days in March of the following year. However, in this case, the probabilities are built into the code of the game, and thus the statistics are more reliabe because they are controlled and not merely obsereved from a limited sample size.

For example, Shagsbeard was talking about standard deviations. This is important to know because a simple probability might say that Hell Meph has odds of dropping item "X" of 1:10,000. Does this mean that if we run Meph 10,000 times, he will drop that item? No, but a standard deviation can tell us "how many times do I need to run Meph before I have a 95% probability of finding that item". Obviously, that would take more than 10,000 runs.

If someone were to find item "X" after 5 Meph runs, does that make him a cheater? Of course not. You always have a probability, however slight, of finding any item on your first run. However, take that probability and multiply it for each of the items on that list over the amount of runs you could actually accomplish in a 3-week span and that number starts to get very, VERY, small. Does this now mean he must be a cheater? Still no. I agree that there's no reason to claim cheating in this case other than the "it sounds too good to be true" argument, so I'm certainly not in favor of making any accusations without some other reason to suspect foul play (inconsistent stories, impossible ilvls, etc.).

That being said, I also don't like to see people swing too far in the other direction by implying that the numbers don't mean anything, because it would be foolish to ignore the numbers.

My intention is not to flame anyone or escalate any hostility. I just felt the need to defend the position of those, like myself, who tend to look at things from a more analytical perspective. I may disagree with the reasons this thread was started in the first place, but that doesn't mean we can't use it as an opportunity to discuss some of these issues. Especially since it seems to be growing source of contention around here lately.

I understand completely about statistics, but you did misunderstand what I was saying. I was not saying that the probability of finding a specific item is not based on hard data. There is no hard data as to the number of runs he did, so to say he could not have found these things in the amount of time stated is without merit.

I agree that you use the numbers to make educated guesses on finds or probablities of Monster X dropping such and such an item, but it is not proof that someone could not have two Tyrael's drop in two Pit runs. I should never have been able to gamble a Stormlash in within the number of times I tried, but I did (Yes, I mention this every chance I get!:grin: )

 

[Gabriel74]

Well, as for me, I didn't understand the "shame on the SPF" comments.


That and I am at work, and I am extremely bored.

 

[Darkwell1]

Well, as for me, I didn't understand the "shame on the SPF" comments.

I think this relates to the appearance that the forum seems trigger-happy lately. At least more so than the past.

That and I am at work, and I am extremely bored.

Well, you could lend a hand upstairs.....bedpans await.

 

[Oreius]

I was not saying that the probability of finding a specific item is not based on hard data. There is no hard data as to the number of runs he did, so to say he could not have found these things in the amount of time stated is without merit.

Ah, well your comment makes much more sense to me then. Thanks for the clarification :grin:

Although I would say that the amount of time is still a reasonable indicator of the likely number of runs that one would be capable of accomplishing, so there was some basis for which to apply a statistical perspective. I agree that it would involve more speculation and the data wouldn't be as "hard", however.

I agree that you use the numbers to make educated guesses on finds or probablities of Monster X dropping such and such an item, but it is not proof that someone could not have two Tyrael's drop in two Pit runs.

Which is almost exactly what I said in my post. I don't think anyone was disputing this fact, which is why I (and others) said that I don't agree with accusing someone of cheating without more than just the "too lucky to be true" aspect to base it on.

For those who are calling for the thread to die because of how it was started: I don't feel that this has been a flamewar. Noodle apologized, things got solved amicably, and there was some (I think) productive discussion that came out of it. I know it started out a little bumpy, but sometimes it's better to give people a chance to work through the discussion than to just shut it down and let things fester.

 

[FlimFlan]

Ah, well your comment makes much more sense to me then. Thanks for the clarification :grin:

Although I would say that the amount of time is still a reasonable indicator of the likely number of runs that one would be capable of accomplishing, so there was some basis for which to apply a statistical perspective. I agree that it would involve more speculation and the data wouldn't be as "hard", however.




Which is almost exactly what I said in my post. I don't think anyone was disputing this fact, which is why I (and others) said that I don't agree with accusing someone of cheating without more than just the "too lucky to be true" aspect to base it on.

For those who are calling for the thread to die because of how it was started: I don't feel that this has been a flamewar. Noodle apologized, things got solved amicably, and there was some (I think) productive discussion that came out of it. I know it started out a little bumpy, but sometimes it's better to give people a chance to work through the discussion than to just shut it down and let things fester.

I was in a hurry and did not get to think through what I was typing.

By the way, I absolutely HATE your avatar. No offense, but as a long suffering Indians fan, I have to hate it. :wink3:

 

[AeroGear]

These jealousy problems would'nt exist if you eliminated the need for "bragging threads" about new item finds.

 

[Oreius]

By the way, I absolutely HATE your avatar. No offense, but as a long suffering Indians fan, I have to hate it. :wink3:

Huh. . . wa. . . . . oh that's it, NOW it's a flamewar! :grin:

Looks like we're both in the same boat this year: you guys have to keep Chicago in check and we have to deal with the Mets. We're not going to make it to October if we don't get some bullpen help though.

 

[JihadJesus]

You cannot use statistics to prove anything... It's just odds and probabilities...

You can prove that something is highly unlikely to have occured simply by random chance, which would be sufficient for our purposes, I would think.

 

[Hoop76]

I like how you see people making "posts" saying quit posting

 

[chickenhed]

Just so I understand. A post was created for the sole reason of calling someone out based on his luck? Like.... an actual thread was created for this? No proof of something non legit. Just his luck? And the guy was even kind enough to post the atma statistics which, by the way, he did NOT have to do? The guilty before innocent feeling I get here sometimes is incredibly depressing.

Yes I know many of you want this to die. And it should. But lynch mobbing someone into proving their innocence? That makes me sick.

 

[Nightfish]

You can prove that something is highly unlikely to have occured simply by random chance, which would be sufficient for our purposes, I would think.

Ok, then show me where to draw the line. How much may I find in 5 runs to be still legit? I just did a Tunnel run and I got a Gimmershred from the second boss I killed. That's a chance of 1:15000 at my MF. Wow, it should have taken 15000 bosses but I get it at the second. Do I hack now?

(this was an example. Please take it as such. I know I do not just kill bosses, I'm just not in the mood to count the monsters I kill just to make a point)

 

[JihadJesus]

Ok, then show me where to draw the line. How much may I find in 5 runs to be still legit? I just did a Tunnel run and I got a Gimmershred from the second boss I killed. That's a chance of 1:15000 at my MF. Wow, it should have taken 15000 bosses but I get it at the second. Do I hack now?

(this was an example. Please take it as such. I know I do not just kill bosses, I'm just not in the mood to count the monsters I kill just to make a point)

I suppose I should have been more clear: I wasn't saying that something unlikely happening was proof that someone was duping. I was trying to imply that it IS possible, since the mechanics of the system are well known, to determine just how unlikely some Ssring of occurences is. People then have to judge for themselves whether or not they think chance can stretch that far.

 

[Nightfish]

The thing is that good item drops will likely always be very unlikely, ya know? And a low probability will never prove anything. As for people judging for themselves... Well, it seems that the chances of the verdict being guilty depends on the date of registry or number of posts made. Not cool, imo.

There have been so many legitness debates lately. The gambling issue, then there was somebody claming SP runewords were too good to be true. Funny, though, in this case the SPF as a whole was all like "no way! we all have good runewords that are highly unlikely but they're all legit". Imo stuff like this should be brought up in the form of accusations unless there's at least something like an iffy ilvl or something. Just saying "you guys are too lucky" doesn't work.

 

[Drixx]

The thing is that good item drops will likely always be very unlikely, ya know? And a low probability will never prove anything. As for people judging for themselves... Well, it seems that the chances of the verdict being guilty depends on the date of registry or number of posts made. Not cool, imo.

There have been so many legitness debates lately. The gambling issue, then there was somebody claming SP runewords were too good to be true. Funny, though, in this case the SPF as a whole was all like "no way! we all have good runewords that are highly unlikely but they're all legit". Imo stuff like this should be brought up in the form of accusations unless there's at least something like an iffy ilvl or something. Just saying "you guys are too lucky" doesn't work.

I agree 100% with your first point NF. Someone's date of registration and number of posts has absolutely NOTHING to do with their legitness. I believe the forum has learned that the hard way in the past?

As for your final point, I think what happened was someone claimed there was tons of hard to do runewords and that the SPF was a bunch of hacks, and then it became obvious the guy was just ranting about nothing. I know of like what... 2 BoTD's from SPF members? No faith that I can recall... *shrug*

 

[Nightfish]

The one I was refering to was complaining about the stats. Like, if a runeword has 100-300% ED ours seemed to be more like 289% than 103%.