View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 190
# 44
02-07-2013, 08:20 AM
The human factor isn't, I think, as critical. What are the odds that a player will track the results of every console created? That will seriously reduce the sample pool, and make it unlikely for the player to be an unlucky outlier. And if there are some "unlucky" players, where are the lucky ones? Someone pulling MKXII purple disruptor coils every other console would be crowing about it on the forums! (with STF old-style loot, there were definitely those who were unable to find that last piece, while others found all three in a few STFs)

I am curious how the loot tables are created and handled in the code. Are the consoles listed in alphabetical order? Or in chronological order? Perhaps there is a problem in how loot is generated, and things in certain positions on the list have a skewed probability of dropping; ie rounding or something is causing things later in the list to have a lower chance of dropping. Bort isn't going to share code, but perhaps he could test flipping the order in a way that should not change the results.

Another possibility is how the random number to jump into the list is generated. RNGs are hard to do well, and its possible that someone developed what they thought was a good RNG (hell, could even be a problem in the compiler), but it has some flaw in it causing a skew in the results. It would be interesting to run the same RNG algorithm in a separate environment and histogram the results. Could be that with a small sample size the RNG looks random, but as you run up more samples the RNG starts showing some peaks and valleys in the histogram.