I have pretty good con.. and yet i fail significantly more than my share of res's. Ebgar has failed 4% of his total res's since he has gotten the spell, and I would estimate that he has failed at least 15% of his res's on my corpses. Likewise, Ive failed a relatively high percentage of res's from other ressers.
Now I know it might be dumb luck.. but im wondering.. do mages have a greater chance of failing res? I mean, if they do.. thats adding insult to injury. We are the toughest classes to exp, and then we fail more res's then anyone else.
Anyone else think they have failed more than there share of res's? I'm thinking the baseline should be ebgar's 4% failure rate. If your failing 10-15% of your res's then im interested in hearing about it. Likewise, if your failing less than your share of res's, I'm also interested. I want to get a good idea about what classes (and their relevant stats) are most prone to res failure.
Res failures
< 439h/439H 116v/122V >
<> help resurrect
RESURRECT
Spell.
Area of effect: <corpse>
Aggressive: No
Cumulative: N/A
Duration: Instantaneous
Class/Circle: Cleric 10th
Type of spell: Healing
This spell will restore life to a corpse, negating 80% of the
experience lost by the death. It is not without risks however.
If the person being resurrected has low constitution, the strain
of being resurrected may be too great, in which case the spell
may fail, and the corpse will be incapable of being restored to
life. There is also a chance, also based on constitution, that
the strain of being resurrected will permanently damage the health
and/or mind of the victim. The person being resurrected will
suffer severe penalties to all attributes, hitpoints, and movement
points for up to 12 game hours after resurrection.
When a player is resurrected, all of the items he/she was wearing
[RETURN for more, q to quit]
or carrying will drop to the ground. There will be no reimbursements
for dropped items due to resurrection. It is also ILLEGAL to resurrect
a player for the purpose of stealing the items he/she is wearing.
Clerics must get permission from the player before casting the spell. If your are an Illusionist and your name starts with C and ends with H, you will fail most of your resses.
seems to explain it to me.
<> help resurrect
RESURRECT
Spell.
Area of effect: <corpse>
Aggressive: No
Cumulative: N/A
Duration: Instantaneous
Class/Circle: Cleric 10th
Type of spell: Healing
This spell will restore life to a corpse, negating 80% of the
experience lost by the death. It is not without risks however.
If the person being resurrected has low constitution, the strain
of being resurrected may be too great, in which case the spell
may fail, and the corpse will be incapable of being restored to
life. There is also a chance, also based on constitution, that
the strain of being resurrected will permanently damage the health
and/or mind of the victim. The person being resurrected will
suffer severe penalties to all attributes, hitpoints, and movement
points for up to 12 game hours after resurrection.
When a player is resurrected, all of the items he/she was wearing
[RETURN for more, q to quit]
or carrying will drop to the ground. There will be no reimbursements
for dropped items due to resurrection. It is also ILLEGAL to resurrect
a player for the purpose of stealing the items he/she is wearing.
Clerics must get permission from the player before casting the spell. If your are an Illusionist and your name starts with C and ends with H, you will fail most of your resses.
seems to explain it to me.
From what I've seen mage classes appear to fail more, since a lot of them are elves or have lower con. On the same note, warriors seem to do better, since lots of them are dwarfs or barbs.
Class doesn't make a differnace as Shev said, but I think race does due to the con modifiers.
As fo ryour situation, dunno Corth. I'll check my res stats when I get home later, but I think humans were pretty good (around 5% failure).
Class doesn't make a differnace as Shev said, but I think race does due to the con modifiers.
As fo ryour situation, dunno Corth. I'll check my res stats when I get home later, but I think humans were pretty good (around 5% failure).
84 natural con, and boy, do I wince when I get ressed with no con gear on. I've only failed one ress, but on the flip side, I was losing con points like nobody's business. Before that little aspect of ress was removed, I'm fairly sure I lost 5 points of con to resses, and I wasn't ressed that often back then. Now the silly con drain is gone, and I'm stuck with wearing con gear for the rest of my playing days... as if my little elven hitpoints weren't bad enough.
Hrmm, xebes, if your failing at a 4% rate, then you would have had to have been resed more than 250 times in order to accrue 4 failures. I doubt even you have died that much 
At a 10% rate you would have failed 12 out of 120 total ress's. Does that sound about right?
I'm not good with statistics.. can anyone figure out what the probability is of failing 10% of your res's (12 out of 120) assuming that the failure rate is 4% uniform without any modifiers such as con?
Also, I would appreciate it if any other human mages could post their success (or lack of success) in ressing. The only two human mages to post here, me and xebes, seem to be having lots of problems.
Corth
At a 10% rate you would have failed 12 out of 120 total ress's. Does that sound about right?
I'm not good with statistics.. can anyone figure out what the probability is of failing 10% of your res's (12 out of 120) assuming that the failure rate is 4% uniform without any modifiers such as con?
Also, I would appreciate it if any other human mages could post their success (or lack of success) in ressing. The only two human mages to post here, me and xebes, seem to be having lots of problems.
Corth
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Corth:
<B>I'm not good with statistics.. can anyone figure out what the probability is of failing 10% of your res's (12 out of 120) assuming that the failure rate is 4% uniform without any modifiers such as con?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
If failing is a 4% chance (ie .04), then the probability of failing two resses in a row is (.04)^2, and the probability of failing n resses in a row is (.04)^n. It would get infinitately small (ie zero) as n gets very large.
Ok you want to know that given the probabilty that failing is 4%, then you get 10 out of 120 failures.
Hrm... You have to use probability distributions to do this. I would have to look it up.
BRB
Trogar
<B>I'm not good with statistics.. can anyone figure out what the probability is of failing 10% of your res's (12 out of 120) assuming that the failure rate is 4% uniform without any modifiers such as con?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
If failing is a 4% chance (ie .04), then the probability of failing two resses in a row is (.04)^2, and the probability of failing n resses in a row is (.04)^n. It would get infinitately small (ie zero) as n gets very large.
Ok you want to know that given the probabilty that failing is 4%, then you get 10 out of 120 failures.
Hrm... You have to use probability distributions to do this. I would have to look it up.
BRB
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Trogar:
<B>Ok you want to know that given the probabilty that failing is 4%, then you get 10 out of 120 failures.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You need a binomial distribution to solve this. The math works as follows.
120!
-------- (0.04)^10 (0.96)^110
10! 110!
=0.01365050495
So the chance of failing 10 resses out of 120 resses is 1.3%. Ress is fubared because it is HIGHELY improabable to fail 10 resses. Assuming I did the distribution right, which I am pretty sure it is. Been a few years since I took statistics.
I now present a theorem:
Trogar's Theorem: Corth is a very unlucky loser.
Trogar the Mathematician
[This message has been edited by Trogar (edited 01-06-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Trogar (edited 01-06-2002).]
<B>Ok you want to know that given the probabilty that failing is 4%, then you get 10 out of 120 failures.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You need a binomial distribution to solve this. The math works as follows.
120!
-------- (0.04)^10 (0.96)^110
10! 110!
=0.01365050495
So the chance of failing 10 resses out of 120 resses is 1.3%. Ress is fubared because it is HIGHELY improabable to fail 10 resses. Assuming I did the distribution right, which I am pretty sure it is. Been a few years since I took statistics.
I now present a theorem:
Trogar's Theorem: Corth is a very unlucky loser.
Trogar the Mathematician
[This message has been edited by Trogar (edited 01-06-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Trogar (edited 01-06-2002).]
Oh I'm sorry Gene. YOu asked to figure out 12 failures out of 120, not 10 failures. Anyway, that would be less then 1.3% obviously. I'll get the exact number for you.
Hrm I worked it out. Interesting. Heheh you have to understand that probabilities are based on exponential functions, so they grow very VERY fast.
120!
-------- (0.04)^12 (0.96)^108
12! 108!
= .002152640395
So the chance of failing 12 resses out of 120 with a 4% failure rate is 1/5th of 1 percent.
Trogar
Hrm I worked it out. Interesting. Heheh you have to understand that probabilities are based on exponential functions, so they grow very VERY fast.
120!
-------- (0.04)^12 (0.96)^108
12! 108!
= .002152640395
So the chance of failing 12 resses out of 120 with a 4% failure rate is 1/5th of 1 percent.
Trogar
Trogar knows how to calculate that type of stuff... but *I'm* the loser?!
heheh, thanks for the calculation. I think xebes having has 120 total res's is conservative. He has had less i imagine. But even using 120, it would be a minute chance that he would fail all those res's at a 4% rate. Also, he has 91 natural con and holds con eq during res's. So I dont think con is the major factor here..
Hrmm.. shev said that all classes and races are equal as far as res failure goes. That would imply also that con isn't a factor since some races have higher con than others. (i.e. dorf v. grey elf). If con was a factor, then grey elves would fail many more res's than dwarves.. but I dont get the impression that this is the case.
Corth
heheh, thanks for the calculation. I think xebes having has 120 total res's is conservative. He has had less i imagine. But even using 120, it would be a minute chance that he would fail all those res's at a 4% rate. Also, he has 91 natural con and holds con eq during res's. So I dont think con is the major factor here..
Hrmm.. shev said that all classes and races are equal as far as res failure goes. That would imply also that con isn't a factor since some races have higher con than others. (i.e. dorf v. grey elf). If con was a factor, then grey elves would fail many more res's than dwarves.. but I dont get the impression that this is the case.
Corth
Actually, heh, since you bring it up, im wondering if that "luck" stat that nobody knows anything about (but everyone knows exists), has anything to do with it.
But seriously, I fail like 15% of my res's. It can't possibly be random.. the probabilities would be miniscule given the # of res's that I had and the overall res failure rate of 4%. Its either con, or some other stat. I'd like to be able to figure out what it is.
But seriously, I fail like 15% of my res's. It can't possibly be random.. the probabilities would be miniscule given the # of res's that I had and the overall res failure rate of 4%. Its either con, or some other stat. I'd like to be able to figure out what it is.
I would say my failure rate is above 4%.
Anyway, its all a roll of a die on the mud.
If you get above a certain number it works.
If you get below a certain number it fails.
If you've failed a lot, you got some crappy rolls. Its random.
If you've not failed at all, you got some good rolls. Its random.
I've failed a bunch and I have 100 con natural. :P Its random.
Dornax
Jurdex
Anyway, its all a roll of a die on the mud.
If you get above a certain number it works.
If you get below a certain number it fails.
If you've failed a lot, you got some crappy rolls. Its random.
If you've not failed at all, you got some good rolls. Its random.
I've failed a bunch and I have 100 con natural. :P Its random.
Dornax
Jurdex
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Glorishan:
Trogar, when was the last time you had a date? I think Corth was right, you're the loser! :P</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
FEH Ryan! Its like 2nd year material.
I think you and Corth were both philosophy majors... some of us actually did things in university :-P.
Trogar
Trogar, when was the last time you had a date? I think Corth was right, you're the loser! :P</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
FEH Ryan! Its like 2nd year material.
I think you and Corth were both philosophy majors... some of us actually did things in university :-P.
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Corth:
<B>And you were doing something at the university? Oh yah, thats right, you were leading jot every... single... day!
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But but but... I was leading the philosophers!!!!
<B>And you were doing something at the university? Oh yah, thats right, you were leading jot every... single... day!
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But but but... I was leading the philosophers!!!!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Trogar:
So the chance of failing 12 resses out of 120 with a 4% failure rate is 1/5th of 1 percent</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
and tche chance of failing the next ress still is 4%, that dont change due to history.
the thought that now ive lost twice so i cant loose in like 50 tries is just the fallacity of the gambler, its the way ppl loose their houses etc...../fil
So the chance of failing 12 resses out of 120 with a 4% failure rate is 1/5th of 1 percent</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
and tche chance of failing the next ress still is 4%, that dont change due to history.
the thought that now ive lost twice so i cant loose in like 50 tries is just the fallacity of the gambler, its the way ppl loose their houses etc...../fil
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by fildur:
<B> and tche chance of failing the next ress still is 4%, that dont change due to history.
the thought that now ive lost twice so i cant loose in like 50 tries is just the fallacity of the gambler, its the way ppl loose their houses etc...../fil</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
NO. You misread the question. The chance to fail each individual ress is 4%. Read my very first post about (0.04)^n.
The question is what was the probability of failing 12 resses out of 120 if the percent of failing is 4%. In which case my analysis is correct.
Trogar
<B> and tche chance of failing the next ress still is 4%, that dont change due to history.
the thought that now ive lost twice so i cant loose in like 50 tries is just the fallacity of the gambler, its the way ppl loose their houses etc...../fil</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
NO. You misread the question. The chance to fail each individual ress is 4%. Read my very first post about (0.04)^n.
The question is what was the probability of failing 12 resses out of 120 if the percent of failing is 4%. In which case my analysis is correct.
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Vipplin:
I have a good friend who majored in Math undergrad then went for a masters in philosophy - a natural extension of his studies in Math. If you go far enough in the field, Trogar...
</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's interesting. Almost everything is a natural extension of mathematics. Engineering, Physics, Computer Science, Commerce, Economics were all built by mathematicians. If you can do math, there are a lot of doors open to you if you apply it to another discipline. however if you do math and only math, you are stuck being a professor cause there is no math industry.
Trogar
I have a good friend who majored in Math undergrad then went for a masters in philosophy - a natural extension of his studies in Math. If you go far enough in the field, Trogar...
</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That's interesting. Almost everything is a natural extension of mathematics. Engineering, Physics, Computer Science, Commerce, Economics were all built by mathematicians. If you can do math, there are a lot of doors open to you if you apply it to another discipline. however if you do math and only math, you are stuck being a professor cause there is no math industry.
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Trogar:
<B>
But but but... I was leading the philosophers!!!!</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
but the probabilty is
.002152640394
not
.002152640395
<B>
But but but... I was leading the philosophers!!!!</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
but the probabilty is
.002152640394
not
.002152640395
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Trogar:
<B> NO. You misread the question. The chance to fail each individual ress is 4%. Read my very first post about (0.04)^n.
The question is what was the probability of failing 12 resses out of 120 if the percent of failing is 4%. In which case my analysis is correct.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
i dint misread i just wanted to point out what it means with 4%, it dont change the probqability of the next case. and as you pointed out theres 0.2 % chance of 12 fails in 120 trys, that means that its not surprising that there is cases where this exist, ask any resser, how many resses have ye done.....quite some i believe, and for quite alot ppl too...../fil
<B> NO. You misread the question. The chance to fail each individual ress is 4%. Read my very first post about (0.04)^n.
The question is what was the probability of failing 12 resses out of 120 if the percent of failing is 4%. In which case my analysis is correct.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
i dint misread i just wanted to point out what it means with 4%, it dont change the probqability of the next case. and as you pointed out theres 0.2 % chance of 12 fails in 120 trys, that means that its not surprising that there is cases where this exist, ask any resser, how many resses have ye done.....quite some i believe, and for quite alot ppl too...../fil
Fildur:
I'll take your gambling analogy and run with it. A penny has a 50/50 chance of being heads, and of being tails. Now say your betting money that the penny will be heads. You flip it 100 times, and its tails 70 times. Well, it might just have been luck.. maybe you flip it 100 more times and you'll get 30 tails. However, at a certain point the probability of something happening is so low that it leads to the conclusion that something is fishy. If you flipped that penny 100 times, and 98 times it was tails (the chances of this happening are infinitesimal), you can pretty much conclude that the person your betting with is using a loaded penny.
We saw that the chance of xebes failing 12 out of 120 res's, at 4% rate of failure, was extremely small (1/5 of 1 percentage point). I submit that xebes has a higher chance of failing a res than your typical player. Its not a 4% chance on his res. You have people in this thread posing that they've had dozens and dozens of res's and have never failed one. The chances of that happening are real small too.
So what is the point of all this? I was hoping if enough people posted their experience, we could figure out what factors lead to a greater chance of failing a res. It didn't happen cause there isn't a large enough sample size.
I think though that con, believe it or not, has been eliminated as a factor. I'm hearing about grey elves that hardly ever fail, and humans that fail at extremly high rates.
I'm guessing the luck stat that is hidden from players is the biggest factor.
Corth
Ex
I'll take your gambling analogy and run with it. A penny has a 50/50 chance of being heads, and of being tails. Now say your betting money that the penny will be heads. You flip it 100 times, and its tails 70 times. Well, it might just have been luck.. maybe you flip it 100 more times and you'll get 30 tails. However, at a certain point the probability of something happening is so low that it leads to the conclusion that something is fishy. If you flipped that penny 100 times, and 98 times it was tails (the chances of this happening are infinitesimal), you can pretty much conclude that the person your betting with is using a loaded penny.
We saw that the chance of xebes failing 12 out of 120 res's, at 4% rate of failure, was extremely small (1/5 of 1 percentage point). I submit that xebes has a higher chance of failing a res than your typical player. Its not a 4% chance on his res. You have people in this thread posing that they've had dozens and dozens of res's and have never failed one. The chances of that happening are real small too.
So what is the point of all this? I was hoping if enough people posted their experience, we could figure out what factors lead to a greater chance of failing a res. It didn't happen cause there isn't a large enough sample size.
I think though that con, believe it or not, has been eliminated as a factor. I'm hearing about grey elves that hardly ever fail, and humans that fail at extremly high rates.
I'm guessing the luck stat that is hidden from players is the biggest factor.
Corth
Ex
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
I'll take your gambling analogy and run with it. A penny has a 50/50 chance of being heads, and of being tails. Now say your betting money that the penny will be heads. You flip it 100 times, and its tails 70 times. Well, it might just have been luck.. maybe you flip it 100 more times and you'll get 30 tails. However, at a certain point the probability of something happening is so low that it leads to the conclusion that something is fishy. If you flipped that penny 100 times, and 98 times it was tails (the chances of this happening are infinitesimal), you can pretty much conclude that the person your betting with is using a loaded penny.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yup. Every toss of the penny is independent. Proabailities only really matter at infinity. If you toss a coin infinitly many times, it will be EXACTLY 50%. If you flip a coin 10 million times, it will be like 50.00003 and 49.00097.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
So what is the point of all this? I was hoping if enough people posted their experience, we could figure out what factors lead to a greater chance of failing a res. It didn't happen cause there isn't a large enough sample size.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually. I have only failed 1 ress on soj3 so far. I do not know how many resses i've had. I do know that when we first got ressurection, I had 17 corpses saved (thank you Dornax and Cralya!). Being a warrior I die a fair bit in zones, and I die a fair bit when I explore the mud (wish I was a druid!). I am WELL under the 4% chance.
Trogar
I'll take your gambling analogy and run with it. A penny has a 50/50 chance of being heads, and of being tails. Now say your betting money that the penny will be heads. You flip it 100 times, and its tails 70 times. Well, it might just have been luck.. maybe you flip it 100 more times and you'll get 30 tails. However, at a certain point the probability of something happening is so low that it leads to the conclusion that something is fishy. If you flipped that penny 100 times, and 98 times it was tails (the chances of this happening are infinitesimal), you can pretty much conclude that the person your betting with is using a loaded penny.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yup. Every toss of the penny is independent. Proabailities only really matter at infinity. If you toss a coin infinitly many times, it will be EXACTLY 50%. If you flip a coin 10 million times, it will be like 50.00003 and 49.00097.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
So what is the point of all this? I was hoping if enough people posted their experience, we could figure out what factors lead to a greater chance of failing a res. It didn't happen cause there isn't a large enough sample size.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually. I have only failed 1 ress on soj3 so far. I do not know how many resses i've had. I do know that when we first got ressurection, I had 17 corpses saved (thank you Dornax and Cralya!). Being a warrior I die a fair bit in zones, and I die a fair bit when I explore the mud (wish I was a druid!). I am WELL under the 4% chance.
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Zrax:
<B>
but the probabilty is
.002152640394
not
.002152640395
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hehehhe.
Actually, 1.999999 = 2. The above two numbers would also be equal. Don't ask why :-P.
Trogar
<B>
but the probabilty is
.002152640394
not
.002152640395
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hehehhe.
Actually, 1.999999 = 2. The above two numbers would also be equal. Don't ask why :-P.
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Nida:
Secret luck stat = power? Perhaps it is useful for us non-squiddies after all...</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In all the years I've been MUD'ing on Sojourn, I have never, EVER failed a Ress...
Of course, just because I've only been ress'd once in 5 years doesn't mean anything...
1/1=100%, I like that number!
------------------
Taegost, The one and ONLY STUPER DRUID(tm)
Secret luck stat = power? Perhaps it is useful for us non-squiddies after all...</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In all the years I've been MUD'ing on Sojourn, I have never, EVER failed a Ress...
Of course, just because I've only been ress'd once in 5 years doesn't mean anything...
1/1=100%, I like that number!
------------------
Taegost, The one and ONLY STUPER DRUID(tm)
-
kiryan
- Sojourner
- Posts: 7275
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
- Contact:
caz, troll warrior, has failed prolly 2 out of 50 (maybe as many as 70) resses and i have like a 30 power.
inesa, drow enchanter, has failed 0 out of about 25 resses.
hows your strengh corth and xebes? if there was a secret stat or some wierd factor strength might be it. that would also help explain why mages might be failing alot.
[This message has been edited by kiryan (edited 01-09-2002).]
inesa, drow enchanter, has failed 0 out of about 25 resses.
hows your strengh corth and xebes? if there was a secret stat or some wierd factor strength might be it. that would also help explain why mages might be failing alot.
[This message has been edited by kiryan (edited 01-09-2002).]
-
Magruk Eat Elf
- Sojourner
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 6:01 am
- Location: USA
Luck has nothing to do with it..
It's done through a computer and the answer is always 1 or 0, life or death, yes or oops.. :P
Randonimity (think that's right) does not exist random is never fair, you will always end up losing, it's the illusion you have a chance that makes you think you have a chance.
Philosophy = Let me THINK about it.
Mathematics = Don't COUNT on it.
Fraternity = BEER!
It's done through a computer and the answer is always 1 or 0, life or death, yes or oops.. :P
Randonimity (think that's right) does not exist random is never fair, you will always end up losing, it's the illusion you have a chance that makes you think you have a chance.
Philosophy = Let me THINK about it.
Mathematics = Don't COUNT on it.
Fraternity = BEER!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kiryan:
trogar arent you wrong? in my statistics book they it wasnt 50/50 it was almost 50/50 with an infintessimaly small chance of landing on the edge. so flipping it infinitely number of times should yield at least 1 time of being neither heads nor tails.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hmmmmmmmmm. I was told when taught that it would be exactly 50% - which does not nessicarily mean that it is correct. I am not a statistics guru, I just have minimial knowledge of 1 course.
However, if you treat tossing a coin as a descision problem, where the outcome is either head or tails. I don't see where the idea of being neither a head nor a tail comes from. Unless you are using quantum mechanics of course.
So I don't think so, but I can't proove it. Wierd things happen at infinity ehheeh.
Trogar
trogar arent you wrong? in my statistics book they it wasnt 50/50 it was almost 50/50 with an infintessimaly small chance of landing on the edge. so flipping it infinitely number of times should yield at least 1 time of being neither heads nor tails.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hmmmmmmmmm. I was told when taught that it would be exactly 50% - which does not nessicarily mean that it is correct. I am not a statistics guru, I just have minimial knowledge of 1 course.
However, if you treat tossing a coin as a descision problem, where the outcome is either head or tails. I don't see where the idea of being neither a head nor a tail comes from. Unless you are using quantum mechanics of course.
So I don't think so, but I can't proove it. Wierd things happen at infinity ehheeh.
Trogar
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Corth:
<B>Fildur:
I'll take your gambling analogy and run with it. A penny has a 50/50 chance of being heads, and of being tails. Now say your betting money that the penny will be heads. You flip it 100 times, and its tails 70 times. Well, it might just have been luck.. maybe you flip it 100 more times and you'll get 30 tails. However, at a certain point the probability of something happening is so low that it leads to the conclusion that something is fishy. If you flipped that penny 100 times, and 98 times it was tails (the chances of this happening are infinitesimal), you can pretty much conclude that the person your betting with is using a loaded penny. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
sure theres a difference if the chance isnt what its sayed to be, but still, the probability for the next case wont change on basis on the base of history, thats just a too common misconception of statistics, im not saying that things arent foobared in the case of res, but still if they arent you cant add the history to the future cases and believe that its "soon gonna even out".
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
You have people in this thread posing that they've had dozens and dozens of res's and have never failed one. The chances of that happening are real small too.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
any single statistikal outcome is small, thats the point, but i think that there is a higher probability that the cases of unluck starts a thread on a BBS than lucky cases...
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
So what is the point of all this? I was hoping if enough people posted their experience, we could figure out what factors lead to a greater chance of failing a res. It didn't happen cause there isn't a large enough sample size.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
i dont disagree with that intention, sadly (or luckily), i cant contribute to the sample size, since i havent been ressed since s2 (a ton of resses, 1 loose con)/fil
<B>Fildur:
I'll take your gambling analogy and run with it. A penny has a 50/50 chance of being heads, and of being tails. Now say your betting money that the penny will be heads. You flip it 100 times, and its tails 70 times. Well, it might just have been luck.. maybe you flip it 100 more times and you'll get 30 tails. However, at a certain point the probability of something happening is so low that it leads to the conclusion that something is fishy. If you flipped that penny 100 times, and 98 times it was tails (the chances of this happening are infinitesimal), you can pretty much conclude that the person your betting with is using a loaded penny. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
sure theres a difference if the chance isnt what its sayed to be, but still, the probability for the next case wont change on basis on the base of history, thats just a too common misconception of statistics, im not saying that things arent foobared in the case of res, but still if they arent you cant add the history to the future cases and believe that its "soon gonna even out".
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
You have people in this thread posing that they've had dozens and dozens of res's and have never failed one. The chances of that happening are real small too.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
any single statistikal outcome is small, thats the point, but i think that there is a higher probability that the cases of unluck starts a thread on a BBS than lucky cases...
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
So what is the point of all this? I was hoping if enough people posted their experience, we could figure out what factors lead to a greater chance of failing a res. It didn't happen cause there isn't a large enough sample size.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
i dont disagree with that intention, sadly (or luckily
), i cant contribute to the sample size, since i havent been ressed since s2 (a ton of resses, 1 loose con)/filReturn to “S3 Gameplay Discussion Archive”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests