This statement was meant for
Why are you trying to make this personal? This about the problems with the crafting system, not about people who are talking about said problems.
Personal? I think you’ve misunderstood something. Read the thread along from that part - there’s nothing personal or offensive. At least not by intent!
There you go:
It’s as tangible & non-anecdotal as yours was.
Pics or it didn’t happen…
Oh come on, please at least read the guy’s post before having a go at him. He clearly said that whever he tried crafting better gear it got bricked.
1 Like
Its not really a “thought”. By the very rules of probability you are much less “likely” to fracture 2 items in a row, therefor this “theory” does work. But nothing is 100% so dint expect suddenly for all your enchanting to just succeed.
I’m sure KMQ (or anyone that’s actually good at probability) will correct me here, but the chance to fracture the second item is independent of the chance of fracturing the first. So you can’t have a “sacrificial lamb” item that sucks up the fracture for the one you actually want to craft.
2 Likes
Yes every craft is independent and you can say this is a gamblers fallacy getting into it, ive done alot of testing in reality you will on average (300 item test) get 3 extra enchants on a weapon by breaking something else first.
And that’ll be the gambler’s fallacy you mentioned right there…
2 Likes
That’s not an example, it’s an abstraction.
Open a stream of someone running the monolith for an hour and see how many times does X base drop which you’re seeking.
Oh for sure!
This has to be level 1 base gear with <=8 affixes and no more at level 50+.
Definitely a lot of time & effort was put into this gear!
How did you conduct the experiment with how many attempts? This sounds like a strong case of gambler’s fallacy indeed.
This is only if you look at each craft independently. Most players do not just do 1 enchant and walk away. You must look at how many enchants it is your wishing to do altogether. Here is an example to make more sense
You flip a quarter 3 times. Heads is a successful craft. Tails is a fracture. Each “craft” will have a 50% of doing either. You “craft” is independent of the previous one, but the odds of getting 3 “successful crafts” in a row is actually 12.5%
So as you can see the odds of probability dictate that getting lots of “successful crafts” in a row is more and more unlikely even lower than the independent chance of success this is why a “sacrificial limb” does work.
I took 300 pairs of gloves and i enchanted on them ( no glyphs ) and broke a different item before every enchant. Out of the 300 pairs of gloves they on average had 3 more tiers added than a test of 200 gloves that i did in a previous test where i just enchanted until failure.
Unless you were watching him you have no idea how many items he tried to craft (or how). Maybe he gave it a few goes, got disheartened & then gave up, maybe he was trying to craft any decent base that came his way.
Just so we’re clear, does an example have to be witnessed by at least 5 different randomly selected people from different nations and notarised by the Queen for it to be acceptable as an example rather than an abstraction? 'Cause your example of crafting up 2x T20 BiS items kinda feels quite non-example-y (and it’s not an abstraction either).
1 Like
No.
Your odds of getting 2x success in a row will be 25% and 3x success in a row will be 12.5% but each time when you’ve advanced, your odds of success have been 50%, so too will be your fourth attempt.
thats exactly what i just said
And I’m pretty sure that if you take the same sample & sacrifice rodents to the Dark Gods, you’ll also get an additional few crafts…
1 Like
How does the 50% not become 50% then?
because you tried 3 crafts IN A ROW
And? My fourth attempt will still be 50%.
1 Like
Yes independently