Show me your lunchbox!

some of you guys should try baiting dark scrolls.

I hear the placebo effect works really well on all one-of-a-kind, lose-it-and-you-can't-replace-it items.


Seriously if you use a cursed scroll on a lunchbox you must really not need it much.

I hear the placebo effect works really well on all one-of-a-kind, lose-it-and-you-can't-replace-it items.


Seriously if you use a cursed scroll on a lunchbox you must really not need it much.

The way I see it is, how likely is it that you can fail 20 30% scrolls in a row? Not just failfailfailfailworkfailfail, but failfailfailfailfailfail. If you can fail 20 30% in a row, its likely that the 21th will hit. You might not have 20 30% 1h scrolls but that's why they call it baiting eh. It works well for my scrolling at least.

It's cheaper but riskier, obviously. And the supply of 30% 1h sword is much higher than 10% 1h gm scrolls. But if people wanna eliminate that risk by paying 7+ bil, it's their choice.

The way I see it is, how likely is it that you can fail 20 30% scrolls in a row? Not just failfailfailfailworkfailfail, but failfailfailfailfailfail. If you can fail 20 30% in a row, its likely that the 21th will hit. You might not have 20 30% 1h scrolls but that's why they call it baiting eh. It works well for my scrolling at least.

It's cheaper but riskier, obviously. And the supply of 30% 1h sword is much higher than 10% 1h gm scrolls. But if people wanna eliminate that risk by paying 7+ bil, it's their choice.

Gambler's fallacy.

Each scroll has a 30% chance of working. There's no place saying, "Oh, he failed 20 scrolls, let's give him one that works."

The way I see it is, how likely is it that you can fail 20 30% scrolls in a row? Not just failfailfailfailworkfailfail, but failfailfailfailfailfail. If you can fail 20 30% in a row, its likely that the 21th will hit. You might not have 20 30% 1h scrolls but that's why they call it baiting eh. It works well for my scrolling at least.

It's cheaper but riskier, obviously. And the supply of 30% 1h sword is much higher than 10% 1h gm scrolls. But if people wanna eliminate that risk by paying 7+ bil, it's their choice.

Flip a coin 100 times. It lands heads 100 times
How likely is THE NEXT flip to be tails?
50%
Always.
Always always always.
The Probability for flipping 101 out of 101 Heads is not.
But EACH of those 101 flips is 50%
...
So really cumulative stats are only useful for scrolling a SET- like what is the likely hood of landing 4 30s on my Sauna!

Looking at it individually, yes it will always be 50% (coin), or 30/70%. But if you look at it as a whole.

Look at the chances of failing 10 30%s in a row.

(0.70)^10 ~ 0.028 -> about 3/100

failing 20 30% in a row

(0.70)^20 ~ 0.000797 -> about 8/10,000

It's difficult to fail 20 30%s in a row; it was already hard to fail 10 30%s in a row. the thing with baiting is that the goal is not to get scrolls to land, its getting scrolls to fail. the more that fails, the more likely it is for the next one to work. because as a whole, failing 7 in a row is harder than failing 6 in a row. of course, individually, they will always have the same probability.

and this is a gambler's fallacy in thinking that the more he loses, the more likely he will win the next round. but for gamblers, its a fallacy because he will lose more than he can win. for maple, you only need the win. the rest of the fails were just trash/baits.

anyway, this works for me like i previously mentioned. scrolling is a game of gambling and guess.

Why does it matter if the 20 30%s fail or not? In the end you're still putting a scroll with a 70% chance to fail on your item.

They don't change the percent on the scroll. Each scroll works independently.


Any "rule" that people make for scrolling 30%s will work 30% of the time. Because that's how often they work. It's still a pretty good rate, but it's not "every time".

As good as it might seem, the law of averages never applies to events that have not occurred yet. People who think this way usually prove it by hindsight bias, which is invalid.

Isn't each scroll an independent variable? And thus fail scrolling does nothing but reassure your nerves.

When you've finished your 30%, its chance is over. That means, the next scroll has 30% chance of working, no matter how hard you try.

Failing 7 in a row is harder than failing 6 in a row. But if you've failed 6 in a row, the chance of failing the next is 70%(35%).

Since we don't know how the probability is "calculated", we just have to assume. However, I'd like to believe that all effects in-game uses the same random-algorithm from the server.

Um, What's this about the 8/4 constant values? Sorry, I'm a little out of the loop right now (work kills my brain)

I could try to explain about a priori probability as opposed to conditional probability, but what's the point?

Instead, try the following experiment at home:
- Toss a coin 100 times (or more. the more, the better) and write down the results.
- Now, go over your results. Every time you see three heads in a row, note what the next toss result was. (If you see, say, four heads in a row, and then tail, you need to write down one head and one tail. One head followed the first three heads, and then one tail followed the last three heads).
- Let me know if you see significantly more tails than heads appearing after three heads.
(if you are willing to do a lot more coin tosses, you can study sequences of more heads, and see whether 10 or 20 heads in a row "force" a tail to appear next).

However, we are all assuming that Nexon implemented the scrolling mechanism so that each scroll is an independent event.
I'm pretty sure drops aren't independent events. For example, over hours of farming leprechauns, I have noticed that the charms generally drop in pairs. That is, after one charm drops, another will usually appear within a dozen leps or so. And then there will be no more charms for a long time. Then another pair.
I've seen the same with ore drops from other monsters - very often I'd get two identical drops in rapid succession. But this is not as regular as the leprechaun charms.

I've seen the same with ore drops from other monsters - very often I'd get two identical drops in rapid succession. But this is not as regular as the leprechaun charms.

People find patterns where there aren't any, quite easily.


If you generate random sequences they do tend to come out in pairs pretty often... it's just that you tend to remember the times it happens more than the times it doesn't. Especially with a probability as high as 1 in 20 (or whatever Charms are) it'll happen at least a couple times per hundred kills.

People find patterns where there aren't any, quite easily.

if you use 100 30% scrolls, you will notice that about 30 of them will work 35 of them will fail and 35 of them will blow things up. but you cant base a pattern to scrolling because its random each time and not gonna form a pattern.

i treat scrolling as a guessing game. something like "now that i failed 10 30%, which was a 3% of happening, will the next one hit? because failing the next one in a row is a 2% of happening". of course the next one still has a 30% chance of landing.

Heh, I like how this turned into a discussion of probability. I do realize that each and every scroll you use has an independant value of it's chance of working, but I also agree with Butterfli and Orit. I know that when I'm trying to scroll something and I fail a couple dark scrolls in a row I will go buy a valuable one and use it.

More often than not it does work and that's because even though it may be the same percent chance of working, the odds of failing it go down with each fail you get. It's all well and good to look at them as independant constants, because they are. But if you look at it as a whole it's a random assortment of pass and fail that averages out to whatever percent the scroll is. At any given time you're likely not to get more than 3 or 4 fails in a row.

I don't bait scroll on purpose but if I notice a bad streak in scrolling I will risk a scroll on something more valuable. This has usually turned out to be profitable.

something like "now that i failed 10 30%, which was a 3% of happening, will the next one hit? because failing the next one in a row is a 2% of happening".

There's only a 2% chance of that happening before you used any. (11 in your inventory, 2% of the time they'll all fail)


Once you resolve 10 of them, you're already in a very small set of outcomes. That is, 10 fail 1 works, or 11 fail. They have 30% and 70% chance of happening.

So you're saying that you actually understand probability and specifically choose to deceive yourself, more often than not leading to additional disappointment because your scrolls will fail way more often than 2%?

I don't see the logic in that...

edit: heh.. got ninja-posted twice. 3 posts all at 10:28 :-P

if you use 100 30% scrolls, you will notice that about 30 of them will work 35 of them will fail and 35 of them will blow things up. but you cant base a pattern to scrolling because its random each time and not gonna form a pattern.

i treat scrolling as a guessing game. something like "now that i failed 10 30%, which was a 3% of happening, will the next one hit? because failing the next one in a row is a 2% of happening". of course the next one still has a 30% chance of landing.

So what have you gained by wasting hundreds of 30% scrolls until you get 20 fails in a row?
You know the next one only has a 30% chance of succeeding, same as if it were your first 30% scroll ever.
It only gives you the right to whine "Can you believe it? I had 21 30% scrolls fail on me in a row!" to your buddies. Which is what is most likely (70%) to happen.

[SIZE="1"]

So what have you gained by wasting hundreds of 30% scrolls until you get 20 fails in a row?
You know the next one only has a 30% chance of succeeding, same as if it were your first 30% scroll ever.
It only gives you the right to whine "Can you believe it? I had 21 30% scrolls fail on me in a row!" to your buddies. Which is what is most likely (70%) to happen.

[/SIZE]

They way it needs to be approached is somewhere in between both arguments in my opinion. Yes each scroll only has a 30% chance to work. If you used 1000 scrolls, about 300 would work and the other 700 would fail.

But if you recorded each time you used a scroll you will obviously find that it is a random assortment of passing and failing, it's extremely rare to find many many passes in a row, and it's also rare to see a whole bunch fails in a row, they are randomly distributed. Since whether the scroll passes or not is indeed randomly assorted, you can assume that the more fails you get in a row, the sooner you will get one to pass.

But either way it's not worth wasting money baiting.

it's a guess. each scroll you use will always be a guess. from the first one to the last one and every in between. will it work or will it fail? flipping coins, rolling dice, various percent scrolls, they're all guesses. but rather than guessing randomly, what scrolls you failed consecutively should give you more reason to base your next guess a certain way. if youve been landing a lot of scrolls, the more you feel like the next one will fail. you cant change that fact that you'll have a 30% chance of being right and 70% chance of being wrong, its still just a guess

Um, What's this about the 8/4 constant values? Sorry, I'm a little out of the loop right now (work kills my brain)

stab/slash str multiplier for 2h/1h bw/axe.

However, we are all assuming that Nexon implemented the scrolling mechanism so that each scroll is an independent event.

I don't think so, I assume it's based on an algorithm with a seed. That means, the next value given cannot be computed without the last "randomly" computed number and its index.