Finally Fed Up with DB

124

Comments

  • The real issue isn't the base rng numbers, it's the behind the scenes BS skewing the odds to one crew at the same rarity over another. For example say a pack had mirror Kirk and mirror Spock both available. Rng says there is a 10% chance you get a 5*, but what are the odds it will be Kirk or Spock? It should be, and DB leads us to believe it is 50/50, but I highly doubt this is the case from my experience.
  • Hate to change things on this. Behold on number 3 of my 10 card pull his morning. So I ended up with 2 purples.

    Was that a standard premium pull? I've seen beholds in slots 2-x on event, Tuesday, and special packs, but never on the regular portal 10x.
  • Regular 10X, earned through the campaign, premium track.
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Or how about putting less crew in Tuesday packs? DB knows most people buying want the new person in the pack so then they put in five other people diluting your chances. Put those packs to three people, new legendary and two older super rares.
  • PenguinJim wrote: »
    Where are the people now who say....Don't worry, it all evens out in the RNG universe....

    I’m right here, the guy who saved up 228 premium ten-pulls and got nearly dead-on the expected number of golds. 26 received from 2,280 drops, whereas 29 would be expected from the posted drop rate.

    You got slightly below what you expected. (And even that says it all)
    Show me the guy on the other side of the bell curve.....the guy who got 58 golds from 228 pulls.
    Here's a hint: he doesnt exist.
    I don't exist? :/

    I rarely have the willpower to save my packs, but I had accrued enough dilithium from the monthly card to get 21 390-dil packs after the April Mega, and got eight Legendaries from them. That ratio would be 88 Legendaries from 231 10-pulls, so I guess I beat your "the guy who got 58 golds from 228 pulls" by quite a margin!

    Here are my screenshots of those packs. Sorry, the second pack is missing - it was just another super-rare Lorca. :p Still, not bad overall for ~$11. (Actually about ~20% cheaper than that - I buy Steam gift cards when there are discounts!)

    To get directly back to the topic, I'm surprised no-one's mentioned this already, but one of the most important rules of gambling is that you never gamble more than you're prepared to lose. If you were never taught that in your youth, learning it over a couple hundred bucks in a Star Trek phone game is probably one of the cheaper ways to learn that lesson as an adult.

    Whining and complaining and blaming everyone else for gambling and losing... I don't think that works as well, personally. But that's just my opinion. B)

    The ratio?????
    I guess the time I pulled a Legendary in the first pack would make my ratio....100%.
    You're forgetting the next 60 pulls where you get zilch.
    As said above, that guy still doesnt exist.
    (And by the way, congrats on your pulls)
  • Banjo1012Banjo1012 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 26
    <snip> ~Shan
  • WhatMeWorryWhatMeWorry ✭✭✭
    edited August 26
    <snip> ~Shan

  • WhatMeWorryWhatMeWorry ✭✭✭
    edited August 25
    It's all there on Page 1 of this thread.
    I didnt invent nor exaggerate any of the numbers.
    You can do the math yourself.

    Let's just agree to disagree.
    Some folks are happy getting no Legendaries in a 10-pack, some people aren't.
    You can support doing something about that, or you can do nothing.
    You can believe the RNG Universe argument, or you don't.

    When, and if, things change to enhance player happiness, so be it.
  • Picard loves RedsPicard loves Reds ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25
    I'm not a mathmatician, so I'm not quite sure how to ask this. Has anyone posted a graph or chart of what the drop rate distribution should look like, assuming that the RNG produced a standard bell curve?

    Maybe another way to ask this would be, "Assuming a 1.27% drop rate and a normal distribution, the expected number of legendaries in x-number of 10x pulls is 0-y (where "y" represents the 6-sigma maximum) with 0 occurring approximately % of the time." A chart that listed this for 5-100 10x pulls would be awesome. Is it possible to create such a chart?

    I know the guaranteed drop of the SR alters the math slightly, but it would be nice to see some verifiable math instead of the same old, "DB's cheating us-math says they're not" debate.
  • Average GuyAverage Guy ✭✭✭✭
    Where are the people now who say....Don't worry, it all evens out in the RNG universe....

    I’m right here, the guy who saved up 228 premium ten-pulls and got nearly dead-on the expected number of golds. 26 received from 2,280 drops, whereas 29 would be expected from the posted drop rate.

    You got slightly below what you expected. (And even that says it all)
    Show me the guy on the other side of the bell curve.....the guy who got 58 golds from 228 pulls.
    Here's a hint: he doesnt exist.
    The rules associated with the Timelines RNG are skewed towards the negative.
    There is no balance in this Universe....ie...no true fairness. (50% in favor of player, 50% in favor of DB)

    As I mentioned in another thread...to which you did not respond.....why arent there in place rules to prevent a player from having the "zilch" experience? They are more than easy enough to code.

    You know the answer already: Such rules dont make DB any money.

    So, please, continue to peddle the myth that RNG is fair...that those who know statistics don't know what we're talking about, etc.....

    Unicorns, rainbows, and the fair RNG...

    But ask yourself this question first before being a "Probability Apologist" next time:
    If the roles were reversed - and you stood to make more money with rules biased against players - would you do exactly the same thing?

    Of course you would.

    Case Closed.

    RNG in the STT works as intended, not as statistically correct. It works the way they want it to work and it's tweaked, I am sure regularly, to get the results they want. Extreme values are averaged out to give them the results they want (which is within their rights as owner of the game). It is within our right not to spend and not to play (which as long as the game is fun, players will do one or both of the above).

    If RNG worked according to statistics, players wouldn't get extreme situations daily. I go into the gauntlet and the 5% crit rating on the first two pulls is less than 5%. On the third pull though, I get critical hits (and often double crit) against me by 5% crit characters with half my proficiency points and routinely lose battles I should only lose 5% of the time. This happens almost every reset. The overall rate is 5% crit and "working as intended" (and I believe those are the words DB used once in a forum post once) but the extreme rate of crits I see against me on the third pull is beyond what would be considered normal. On the flip side, I also win battles I have no business winning far too often (but far less often on the third battle).

    Overall the rates are what DB want them to be but I am sure if everyone tracked everything, they would notice far too many extreme situations (on both sides of the coin) daily. This isn't correct RNG according to statistics but intended RNG to keep the game running the way they want it. When it's not fun, or not fun to spend on, players will walk away and they walk a fine line with this stuff because the forum pages are becoming more and more full of players complaining about RNG. The forums may only represent a small sample size, but proportionately, it should represent the whole (similar to election polling). If a large number of players ofthe forum base are complaining about RNG, you can be sure a large number of players of the non forum base are thinking about it too.
  • Average GuyAverage Guy ✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Where are the people now who say....Don't worry, it all evens out in the RNG universe....

    I’m right here, the guy who saved up 228 premium ten-pulls and got nearly dead-on the expected number of golds. 26 received from 2,280 drops, whereas 29 would be expected from the posted drop rate.

    You got slightly below what you expected. (And even that says it all)
    Show me the guy on the other side of the bell curve.....the guy who got 58 golds from 228 pulls.
    Here's a hint: he doesnt exist.
    The rules associated with the Timelines RNG are skewed towards the negative.
    There is no balance in this Universe....ie...no true fairness. (50% in favor of player, 50% in favor of DB)

    As I mentioned in another thread...to which you did not respond.....why arent there in place rules to prevent a player from having the "zilch" experience? They are more than easy enough to code.

    You know the answer already: Such rules dont make DB any money.

    So, please, continue to peddle the myth that RNG is fair...that those who know statistics don't know what we're talking about, etc.....

    Unicorns, rainbows, and the fair RNG...

    But ask yourself this question first before being a "Probability Apologist" next time:
    If the roles were reversed - and you stood to make more money with rules biased against players - would you do exactly the same thing?

    Of course you would.

    Case Closed.

    How about the person who went 3/3?
    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/comment/175770#Comment_175770
    b39fecfmrg2b.jpeg

    3 in 3 packs. Very happy with the outcome.


    Random occurrences happen on both sides. People are just more likely to complain when it goes against them.

    The problem is that the extreme happens well outside what would be considered normal to create whatever those averages are. Everyone has had those 1 in a million pulls on both sides of RNG and it often occurs daily somewhere in the game.
  • Average GuyAverage Guy ✭✭✭✭
    If DB is going to code for guaranteed legendaries every 10 pulls, oh wait THEY ALREADY DID THAT, for 6500 Dil (10) you can get a guaranteed legendary. Save up your dil and enjoy. I fear that if they tried to implement a guaranteed legendary after x- number of 10x pulls, to keep the average chance the same, they would also have to implement a guaranteed not-to-exceed drop rate. For example, remove the chance for multiple drops in 1 pull or drops in back-to-back pulls, effectively cutting off both ends of the statistical bell curve.

    I think the player base would be much happier with normal RNG rather than the as intended RNG that has people pulling their hair out because it doesn't make sense that too many extreme situations can happen either way.
  • VesmerVesmer ✭✭✭
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    Oddly enough, you complained a couple of weeks ago that this game violates the rules for the Android and Apple stores (by the way, did they respond when you informed them?), you're now saying that this game is illegal, and you consistently complain that the game mechanics are unfair - but I notice you're continuing to spend hundreds of dollars on the game.

    Actually I’m not. Lately I’ve spent much less than I used to. About 200 bucks last month. And I’m gonna spend much less in the future. So you’re probably not so good in analyzing as you think

  • VesmerVesmer ✭✭✭
    edited August 25
    And yes, Apple did respond. Thankfully, they know their stuff and understand this RNG/ statistics matter, in contrast to some players here.
  • PenguinJimPenguinJim ✭✭✭✭✭
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    I notice you're continuing to spend hundreds of dollars on the game.
    Vesmer wrote: »
    About 200 bucks last month.

    Huh, looks spot on to me. 200 = hundreds, in both math and English. And you say you're going to continue to spend - on an app you claim is unfair and should be banned. Rightso.
    Vesmer wrote: »
    And yes, Apple did respond.

    What did Apple say? I notice the app is still live.
    You can do the math yourself.
    Yes, and it's lucky that one of us can! o:)

    As for you calling me a liar about my portal pulls, you can take another look and see the dilithium count down by 390 between each pack (except the missing second pack with Lorca). I didn't omit any packs, nor invent any pulls. Isn't is strange how my claims backed up by evidence are not "credible", but you're taking the numbers on Page 1 at face value without any evidence.
  • I've got to the point in the game where I have all but 5 super rare crew immortalised. I buy the monthly card and campaigns deal and the odd event pack. I always felt that the odds in getting the legendary crew in a Tuesday pack were to low to be worth trying for. Apart from this week where I tried to get Par-wraith Keiko. After 9 goes I failed in getting her. I had the same super rare crew come up 8 times in a row but I did get two Legendary beholds come up. I feel that the RNG got stuck where it kept in giving me the same super rare crew. I bought an event pack and managed to get Keiko on my 10 go.
    I think the odds in getting a Legendary crew is to low. With the number of Legendary crew in the game and with Legendary being added each week it would make the game better if we could Legendary crew more often in portal pulls
  • VesmerVesmer ✭✭✭
    PenguinJim wrote: »

    What did Apple say? I notice the app is still live.

    I don’t think I’m allowed to share it. I’ll just say that I’m satisfied with the result

  • PenguinJimPenguinJim ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vesmer wrote: »
    PenguinJim wrote: »

    What did Apple say? I notice the app is still live.

    I don’t think I’m allowed to share it. I’ll just say that I’m satisfied with the result

    Really? Because when you say things like "So basically what you’re saying is that STT is a gamble app. Well, it have to be clearly stated as such then. And banned at least in the US (as it has servers in the US), Belgium and China (is it even available now in China? I just don’t know)", it doesn't sound like you're particularly satisfied. :D
  • VesmerVesmer ✭✭✭
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    .
    And you say you're going to continue to spend - on an app you claim is unfair and should be banned.

    And so what? What’s your point? I can afford spending for campaigns, monthly card, DYC and other guaranteed stuff even if the app has flawed RNG and in fact is a gambling app (and I think you smart enough to google what’s with ongoing issue to consider micro transactions loot boxes apps as a gambling)

  • PenguinJimPenguinJim ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vesmer wrote: »
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    .
    And you say you're going to continue to spend - on an app you claim is unfair and should be banned.

    And so what? What’s your point? I can afford spending for campaigns, monthly card, DYC and other guaranteed stuff even if the app has flawed RNG and in fact is a gambling app (and I think you smart enough to google what’s with ongoing issue to consider micro transactions loot boxes apps as a gambling)

    If I thought a company was cheating me out of my money, as you're claiming DB are doing with you, I wouldn't give them my money. It's not a question of being able to afford it or not.

    And if I was petitioning authorities claiming that the app was in violation of both store policy and national law, and if I genuinely believed those things to be true, then I would expect the app to be pulled imminently - in which case spending money would be a complete waste - or at the very least, significantly reworked, most likely in my favor - in which case, spending hundreds of dollars immediately before an anticipated rework would be questionable.

    By the way, when words are blue, like this, you can press them with your finger or move your mouse cursor over them and click them. It's a "link", and it connects you to other relevant websites. If you scroll back to my earlier post, you can see I already linked you to information about loot boxes. And your post immediately before that seemed to consider all gambling the same, as if you were completely unaware of loot boxes and loot box legislation. How mysterious! o:)
  • robownagerobownage ✭✭✭✭✭
    Guys, I think maybe these attacks are starting to get a little personal. @Shan is gonna shut this down if we don't start being on our best behaviour.
  • [Mirror] Sanoa[Mirror] Sanoa ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    And if I was petitioning authorities claiming that the app was in violation of both store policy and national law, and if I genuinely believed those things to be true, then I would expect the app to be pulled imminently - in which case spending money would be a complete waste - or at the very least, significantly reworked, most likely in my favor - in which case, spending hundreds of dollars immediately before an anticipated rework would be questionable.
    Not necessarily. For most jurisdictions STT is fine as it is, for some specific ones it might not be but if you do not live there there is very few risk that the game is removed from the store in your place.

    Pulling games from specific jurisdictions due to turning out to be illegal there happens all the time.
    Fun fact about Sims Freeplay: They had to pull the game from some Asian countries due to their LGBT content. The game lives on everywhere else quite fine though.

    @Vesmer maybe just hopes that having to withdraw from some jurisdictions hurts DB enough to make a long term change in the game for everyone.
    Wir, die [Mirror]Tribbles (Event: Top 29) haben freie Plätze zu vergeben. Kein Zwang und kein Stress, dafür aber Spaß, Discord und eine nette Hilfsbereite Gemeinschaft, incl. voll ausgebauter Starbase.
  • VesmerVesmer ✭✭✭
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    Vesmer wrote: »
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    .
    And you say you're going to continue to spend - on an app you claim is unfair and should be banned.

    And so what? What’s your point? I can afford spending for campaigns, monthly card, DYC and other guaranteed stuff even if the app has flawed RNG and in fact is a gambling app (and I think you smart enough to google what’s with ongoing issue to consider micro transactions loot boxes apps as a gambling)

    If I thought a company was cheating me out of my money, as you're claiming DB are doing with you, I wouldn't give them my money. It's not a question of being able to afford it or not.

    And if I was petitioning authorities claiming that the app was in violation of both store policy and national law, and if I genuinely believed those things to be true, then I would expect the app to be pulled imminently - in which case spending money would be a complete waste - or at the very least, significantly reworked, most likely in my favor - in which case, spending hundreds of dollars immediately before an anticipated rework would be questionable.

    By the way, when words are blue, like this, you can press them with your finger or move your mouse cursor over them and click them. It's a "link", and it connects you to other relevant websites. If you scroll back to my earlier post, you can see I already linked you to information about loot boxes. And your post immediately before that seemed to consider all gambling the same, as if you were completely unaware of loot boxes and loot box legislation. How mysterious! o:)

    Well, how the fact that some player continue to spend money in the game makes RNG implementation not flawed? I see that instead of talking objectively about this matter you decided to make this personal. How nice of you. Do me a favor please - just sod off

  • VesmerVesmer ✭✭✭
    robownage wrote: »
    Guys, I think maybe these attacks are starting to get a little personal. @Shan is gonna shut this down if we don't start being on our best behaviour.

    I’m completely with you. But it’s not me who started this. And that person insulted me before in other thread calling a flat Earth believer (yes, I consider this as an insult), insulting me now, so I’m sorry but I had to say him to sod off
  • PenguinJimPenguinJim ✭✭✭✭✭
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    And if I was petitioning authorities claiming that the app was in violation of both store policy and national law, and if I genuinely believed those things to be true, then I would expect the app to be pulled imminently - in which case spending money would be a complete waste - or at the very least, significantly reworked, most likely in my favor - in which case, spending hundreds of dollars immediately before an anticipated rework would be questionable.
    Not necessarily. For most jurisdictions STT is fine as it is, for some specific ones it might not be but if you do not live there there is very few risk that the game is removed from the store in your place.

    Pulling games from specific jurisdictions due to turning out to be illegal there happens all the time.
    Fun fact about Sims Freeplay: They had to pull the game from some Asian countries due to their LGBT content. The game lives one everywhere else quite fine though.

    @Vesmer maybe just hopes that having to withdraw from some jurisdictions hurts DB enough to make a long term change in the game for everyone.

    Vesmer wants it banned from "at least" the US, Belgium and China, according to what they said earlier. I'm not sure the game would survive being withdrawn from the US?
  • [Mirror] Sanoa[Mirror] Sanoa ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    And if I was petitioning authorities claiming that the app was in violation of both store policy and national law, and if I genuinely believed those things to be true, then I would expect the app to be pulled imminently - in which case spending money would be a complete waste - or at the very least, significantly reworked, most likely in my favor - in which case, spending hundreds of dollars immediately before an anticipated rework would be questionable.
    Not necessarily. For most jurisdictions STT is fine as it is, for some specific ones it might not be but if you do not live there there is very few risk that the game is removed from the store in your place.

    Pulling games from specific jurisdictions due to turning out to be illegal there happens all the time.
    Fun fact about Sims Freeplay: They had to pull the game from some Asian countries due to their LGBT content. The game lives one everywhere else quite fine though.

    @Vesmer maybe just hopes that having to withdraw from some jurisdictions hurts DB enough to make a long term change in the game for everyone.

    Vesmer wants it banned from "at least" the US, Belgium and China, according to what they said earlier. I'm not sure the game would survive being withdrawn from the US?

    No, it would not. But imho there is no risk for the game to be illegal in the US. It is their domestic jurisdiction, they know it perfectly. And loot boxes really are not gambling in the core sense of term as one - like mentioned - cannot cash out.

    Not quite sure about others though. China would probably really hurt but not break their back.
    Wir, die [Mirror]Tribbles (Event: Top 29) haben freie Plätze zu vergeben. Kein Zwang und kein Stress, dafür aber Spaß, Discord und eine nette Hilfsbereite Gemeinschaft, incl. voll ausgebauter Starbase.
This discussion has been closed.