so.... here we go...

Forum for In-Game politics, relations, matters of justice, and other in-game topics.

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby Shadow86 » Wed Feb 15, 2017 1:17 am

Lansett wrote:
Chrumps wrote:Can you point out a single instance when it did not extend the season ?

Yes some times ago an Everbloom followed a Bloodmoon.


We was in an everbloom tho, I remember that one. So again it just extended the season we was already in.

EDIT: Not saying I support this bugged season theory, I just wanted correct info out there.
Shadow86
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 6:40 pm

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby nadde991 » Wed Feb 15, 2017 8:09 am

Chrumps wrote:
nadde991 wrote:Looks like the Salem community needs to learn their statistics.
As TMeow said:
TotalyMeow wrote:go read about Gambler's Fallacy, Confirmation Bias, Law of Averages, and Independence of Events.

You clearly didn't read about these.

Yes, I did read about all of them: Gambler's Fallacy is the assumption that probability changes depending on past results, Confirmation Bias is when you try to confirm one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, whilst not considering alternative possibilities, Law of Averages states that the likelihood of certain events evens out if the frequency is increase (more attempts, higher probability) and finally Independence of Events is about two events whose probability does not affect one another.

Crumps wrote:Can you point out a single instance when it did not extend the season ?

By that logic I should also say that the probability of getting an arcane amethyst is bugged because me and my friends got 3 on one blood moon.
0.03 % is not that low, when you think about how many rare items there are and how many people are selling them.
matan002 wrote:i'm on the most updated and highest technologically advanced mac, completely superior to the grub you call windows ¦]
User avatar
nadde991
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:19 pm

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby matan002 » Wed Feb 15, 2017 8:20 am

nadde991 wrote:Yes, I did read about all of them: Gambler's Fallacy is the assumption that probability changes depending on past results, Confirmation Bias is when you try to confirm one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, whilst not considering alternative possibilities, Law of Averages states that the likelihood of certain events evens out if the frequency is increase (more attempts, higher probability) and finally Independence of Events is about two events whose probability does not affect one another.


Image
Lachlaan wrote:The motherbats await a spanking, for the sake of fields.
User avatar
matan002
 
Posts: 938
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:18 pm
Location: Valhalla, Sweden

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby Qiresea » Wed Feb 15, 2017 8:28 am

if the probability for something to happen is 50% at each event, it means that the probability for the event not happening is an inverse exponential function of time, so in principle, you can wait for an infinite amount of time for it to happen. i wouldnt be surprised by the season not changing after a few bloodmoons, the statistics is very low.
User avatar
Qiresea
Customer
 
Posts: 888
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:01 pm
Location: France

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby Chrumps » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:10 am

nadde991 wrote:Yes, I did read about all of them: Gambler's Fallacy is the assumption that probability changes depending on past results,

Where did I assume the probability has changed depending on something else than a suspected bug ?
nadde991 wrote:Confirmation Bias is when you try to confirm one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, whilst not considering alternative possibilities,

No, I am considering two hypotheses: 1-It is dependent on the previous season, 2-It is random with 50/50 chances. So far it is like 5:2.5 for the first hypothese.
nadde991 wrote:Law of Averages states that the likelihood of certain events evens out if the frequency is increase (more attempts, higher probability) finally Independence of Events is about two events whose probability does not affect one another.

Again, where did I state that some frequency has changed?
nadde991 wrote:
Crumps wrote:Can you point out a single instance when it did not extend the season ?

By that logic I should also say that the probability of getting an arcane amethyst is bugged because me and my friends got 3 on one blood moon.
0.03 % is not that low, when you think about how many rare items there are and how many people are selling them.

I agree with you in one point: YOU should learn about statistics.

Qiresea wrote:if the probability for something to happen is 50% at each event, it means that the probability for the event not happening is an inverse exponential function of time, so in principle, you can wait for an infinite amount of time for it to happen. i wouldnt be surprised by the season not changing after a few bloodmoons, the statistics is very low.

Actually waiting infinitely and explaining to oneself it's just statistics would be a particularly sick case of Confirmation Bias.
The chance for the particular series I am referring to is 1/32 (=0.5^5).

On a more practical side:
I am looking for sequences like:
    Everbloom - Blood Moon - Coldsnap
    Coldsnap - Blood Moon - Everbloom
So far it was (IIRC):
    EB-BM-EB
    CS-BM-CS
    EB-BM-EB
    CS-BM-CS
    CS-BM-CS

The last 3 were in 2017, the other 2 in mid 2016 so I might be missing something.
It is written now so I can wait a few bloodmoons more to see a larger sample.
Chrumps
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 9:51 pm
Location: Poland

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby Qiresea » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:21 am

no, it is not a case of confirmation bias. it may need a very long time to happen because the probability function is asymptotic. what i am trying to say is that i dont have any reason to believe that there is a bug in the code at this level of statistics.
User avatar
Qiresea
Customer
 
Posts: 888
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:01 pm
Location: France

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby Chrumps » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:41 am

Qiresea wrote:no, it is not a case of confirmation bias. it may need a very long time to happen because the probability function is asymptotic. what i am trying to say is that i dont have any reason to believe that there is a bug in the code at this level of statistics.

Well, provide a better statistics then.
Chrumps
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 9:51 pm
Location: Poland

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby punker » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:58 am

Chrumps wrote:
nadde991 wrote:Yes, I did read about all of them: Gambler's Fallacy is the assumption that probability changes depending on past results,

Where did I assume the probability has changed depending on something else than a suspected bug ?
nadde991 wrote:Confirmation Bias is when you try to confirm one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, whilst not considering alternative possibilities,

No, I am considering two hypotheses: 1-It is dependent on the previous season, 2-It is random with 50/50 chances. So far it is like 5:2.5 for the first hypothese.
nadde991 wrote:Law of Averages states that the likelihood of certain events evens out if the frequency is increase (more attempts, higher probability) finally Independence of Events is about two events whose probability does not affect one another.

Again, where did I state that some frequency has changed?
nadde991 wrote:
Crumps wrote:Can you point out a single instance when it did not extend the season ?

By that logic I should also say that the probability of getting an arcane amethyst is bugged because me and my friends got 3 on one blood moon.
0.03 % is not that low, when you think about how many rare items there are and how many people are selling them.

I agree with you in one point: YOU should learn about statistics.

Qiresea wrote:if the probability for something to happen is 50% at each event, it means that the probability for the event not happening is an inverse exponential function of time, so in principle, you can wait for an infinite amount of time for it to happen. i wouldnt be surprised by the season not changing after a few bloodmoons, the statistics is very low.

Actually waiting infinitely and explaining to oneself it's just statistics would be a particularly sick case of Confirmation Bias.
The chance for the particular series I am referring to is 1/32 (=0.5^5).

On a more practical side:
I am looking for sequences like:
    Everbloom - Blood Moon - Coldsnap
    Coldsnap - Blood Moon - Everbloom
So far it was (IIRC):
    EB-BM-EB
    CS-BM-CS
    EB-BM-EB
    CS-BM-CS
    CS-BM-CS

The last 3 were in 2017, the other 2 in mid 2016 so I might be missing something.
It is written now so I can wait a few bloodmoons more to see a larger sample.

tilt
User avatar
punker
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby MaxPlanck » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:28 am

Actually the 2 week summer was followed by a coldsnap after BM but nice try.
User avatar
MaxPlanck
Customer
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 3:20 pm

Re: so.... here we go...

Postby nadde991 » Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:23 pm

Listen dude, your statement was it has a 1/32 chance of occurring therefore it's bugged. But guess what? The probability of getting Winter, Summer, Winter, Summer, Winter is also 1/32.
If Winter had a probability of lets say 1% and summer had a probability of 99% I would think it was strange to get 5 in a row but 50 % is really high.
Also I never said that Gambler's Fallacy, Comfirmation Bias... was directly related to this topic, I just meant that if you think getting 5 in a row on a 50 % probability you should probably learn some statistics.
matan002 wrote:i'm on the most updated and highest technologically advanced mac, completely superior to the grub you call windows ¦]
User avatar
nadde991
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:19 pm

PreviousNext

Return to House of Burgesses

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests