Reverse engineering is still bad.

As it was very long time ago, probabilities of RE mean nothing.

Practically it is possible infinitely RE without getting a schematic.

Yes, probabilities mean nothing since the chance is the same of 5,10 or 20% for the first item, for the second item, for 1000000th item since the RE events are unrelated.

Few days ago I REd 44 items to get one schematic.

I won't count this one in the below today's test:

REed 24 Armors/Mod @20% - Expected REs: 4.8 (5) - Real REs: 2 (-240%) - In %: 8.3

REed 19 Heavy and Medium armors @20% - Expected REs: 3.8 (4) - Real REs: 1 (-380%) - In %: 5.26

REed 27 Barrles/Augs @20% - Expected REs: 5 (5.4) - Real REs: 2 (-270%) - In %: 7.4

REed 7 Medpaks @20% - Expected REs: 1 (1.4) - Real REs: 0 (FAIL) - In%: 0% (ignored).

Calculated practical probability from the first 3: 6.987% chance for a drop and that's ignoring the last one that is total zero and the initial one a few days ago that is 0.45%. Even so, that's under 7%.

Please explain. When does that 20% actually happen ?

Anyway, a system that increases the probability of a RE for the same item that failed to RE is needed. The current system is just too cheated, just like I re-re-re confirmed above.

REed 24 Armors/Mod @20% - Expected REs: 4.8 (5) - Real REs: 2 (-240%) - In %: 8.3

REed 19 Heavy and Medium armors @20% - Expected REs: 3.8 (4) - Real REs: 1 (-380%) - In %: 5.26

REed 27 Barrles/Augs @20% - Expected REs: 5 (5.4) - Real REs: 2 (-270%) - In %: 7.4

REed 7 Medpaks @20% - Expected REs: 1 (1.4) - Real REs: 0 (FAIL) - In%: 0% (ignored).

You need to go back and re-study percentage differences. Really, seriously.

Expected: 4.8, actual 2: The actual percentage is (2/4.8)*100 = 41.7%, or -58.3% compared to expectation.

Expected: 3.8, actual 1: The actual percentage is (1/3.8)*100 = 26.3%, or -73.7% compared to expectation.

Expected: 5.4, actual 2: The actual percentage is (2/5.4)*100 = 37.0%, or -63.0% compared to expectation.

Expected: 1.4, actual 0: The actual percentage is (0/1.4)*100 = 0.0%, or -100.0% compared to expectation.

It's still a bit disappointing, but in no way impossible. And maybe it's a display bug in the tooltip...

I had something else in mind with those -NNN%.

Practical probability is plain and correct, that's whats actually relevant.

7 instead of 20 means almost x3 difference.

Then again, I've had many instances where I've gotten a schematic within the first 2 RE's. Yesterday I had to RE 12 blue augments to get the purple schematic. At the same time, I was RE'ing some green armor to get the augment kits and I got the blue schematic twice from only 6 RE's

Swings and round-abouts, as they say.

It's probabilities, *****es.

I also have experiences where the gain seems notable better than percentage. Maybe it is psychological but it MAY be affected by being a subscriber vs F2P.

In general I consider it too easy to get good schematics. It should NOT be just grinding to get X schematic, some luck feels much more rewarding. If your really-really-really want that schematic then current RE does give you that eventually. Personally, the game experience should be more unique per char and getting everything you want does not fit there. I'm definitely against making the rolls dependent on previous rolls and guaranteeing a schematic by N rolls.

If there should be adjustments to RE then it should be made MORE difficult to get schematics (fewer drops, smaller %) and custom-crafted EQ should be notably better than in-game drops (or god forbid - orange EQ). Right now there is very little drive to look for "that famous famous guy making best boots", definitely not until end-game.

Reverse engineering is still bad.

As it was very long time ago, probabilities of RE mean nothing.

Practically it is possible infinitely RE without getting a schematic.

 

Yes, probabilities mean nothing since the chance is the same of 5,10 or 20% for the first item, for the second item, for 1000000th item since the RE events are unrelated.

Your insistence on this is proof our science and mathematics education system is a failure. Probabilities mean EVERYTHING, your "experiments" nothwithstanding. You really need to take a statistics class and not let your emotions get in the way of your understanding. Modern science would not exist without probability. Indeed, that's what Quantum Mechanics is all about.

TL'DR: Working as intended.

Come back when you re'd 1000 items. 10000 would be even better.

I know people who got 10+ win streaks and I had a 70 fail streak once.

The more items you re the closer you will get to the actual %age.

Reverse engineering is still bad.

As it was very long time ago, probabilities of RE mean nothing.

Practically it is possible infinitely RE without getting a schematic.

 

Yes, probabilities mean nothing since the chance is the same of 5,10 or 20% for the first item, for the second item, for 1000000th item since the RE events are unrelated.

 

 

Few days ago I REd 44 items to get one schematic.

 

I won't count this one in the below today's test:

 

REed 24 Armors/Mod @20% - Expected REs: 4.8 (5) - Real REs: 2 (-240%) - In %: 8.3

REed 19 Heavy and Medium armors @20% - Expected REs: 3.8 (4) - Real REs: 1 (-380%) - In %: 5.26

REed 27 Barrles/Augs @20% - Expected REs: 5 (5.4) - Real REs: 2 (-270%) - In %: 7.4

REed 7 Medpaks @20% - Expected REs: 1 (1.4) - Real REs: 0 (FAIL) - In%: 0% (ignored).

 

Calculated practical probability from the first 3: 6.987% chance for a drop and that's ignoring the last one that is total zero and the initial one a few days ago that is 0.45%. Even so, that's under 7%.

 

Please explain. When does that 20% actually happen ?

 

Anyway, a system that increases the probability of a RE for the same item that failed to RE is needed. The current system is just too cheated, just like I re-re-re confirmed above.

When you have a large enough sample pool to draw worthwhile conclusions from. >.>

A percentage based success system doesn't factor in previous attempts when it rolls. Each attempt is 20%. Since we're dealing with percentages and RNGesus for this stuff, the total amount of items you reverse engineered for your numbers need to be higher than 77 spread over 4 different item groups if you want it to show anything useful. >.>

There's almost always going to be a wide variation in a small sample like that just based on odds, just ask players of Aion about enchantment and manastone success rates (if they haven't blocked it out due to PTSD. 80% success rate proven over several different 10,000 enchantment attempt tests for stones 25 levels higher than a fabled weapon's level. Still saw people hit the 20% 10+ times in a row.). Its when you have large samples where the percentages begin to pan out; 7 to 24 tries per item type just isn't anywhere near enough to base data off of.

Please explain. When does that 20% actually happen ?

When you RE several hundreds to several thousand items for schematics you will see that overall the rate of success is roughly 20%

When you RE several hundreds to several thousand items for schematics you will see that overall the rate of success is roughly 20%

Problem is : Will I be able to endure that ? I mean REing "several thousand" items ?

At one point psychology strikes and makes me wan t to give up.

Others, meanwhile, are headstrong enough to keep on going.

Result : People are different. And thus they react differently on the same incidents.

Problem is : Will I be able to endure that ? I mean REing "several thousand" items ?

 

At one point psychology strikes and makes me wan t to give up.

Others, meanwhile, are headstrong enough to keep on going.

 

Result : People are different. And thus they react differently on the same incidents.

All one really needs to do is track RE while leveling a crafting skill and will see several hundreds attempts and will get the 20% overall success rate. I know because I did it twice last year and around this time (optimizing my crew skills, I leveled Armormech on my Trooper and Armstech on my smuggler). And I've told the stories about it on this forum: On my AT I successfully REed two schematics on my first three attempts, I had numerous 20+ fail streaks one going 40+ across three different items (only got one superior schematic from the three). I still have the spreadsheet if you are interested.

Your insistence on this is proof our science and mathematics education system is a failure. Probabilities mean EVERYTHING, your "experiments" nothwithstanding. You really need to take a statistics class and not let your emotions get in the way of your understanding. Modern science would not exist without probability. Indeed, that's what Quantum Mechanics is all about.

 

TL'DR: Working as intended.

Our education system must be a failure since every analysis that I've seen is based on the number of REs which are considered the number of trials. The actual number of trials is rather the number of items crafted for the RE attempt.

As an example, overnight a few days ago, I generated fifteen green armorings to RE to get a blue. I hit the blue on the first RE attempt and was left with fourteen worthless green items. In your sample and analysis, you would have one trial and one success. The correct way of looking at the situation is fifteen trials and one success. No one, especially at the highest level items which take forever to generate, is going to craft one item for one RE trial and if fail then craft another one.

Your analysis model looks at flipping a coin, noting the result, flipping the coin again and noting the result, and so on to infinity where everything just works out peachy keen. The actual model / process is filp a coin fifteen times and note if there is one success, flip the coin fifteen more times and note if there is a success, and so on to infinity where everything is peachy keen. The preceding differ in both analysis, math, and psychological impact.

So even the result of an education system that would not be considered a failure when applied incorrectly (wrong model) gives precise tight results that are incorrect and biased.

PS - I just went after a Hawkeye Implant and got it after 111 attempts. The first 110 tries were a failure (what are the odds of that?). Unfortunately model wise, I got pissed and crafted 20 of the blues overnight and then hit the Hawkeye the first thing the next morning. I was left with 19 of the blue suckers in my bag and have not sold (even though I aggressively undercut everyone on the GTN) one yet. I may just give up and RE them for scrap. How would we look at this. Did I have one success in 111 trials or one success in 130 trials? Do we add the 19 REs with 0 chance of success to our analysis?

Our education system must be a failure since every analysis that I've seen is based on the number of REs which are considered the number of trials. The actual number of trials is rather the number of items crafted for the RE attempt.

 

As an example, overnight a few days ago, I generated fifteen green armorings to RE to get a blue. I hit the blue on the first RE attempt and was left with fourteen worthless green items. In your sample and analysis, you would have one trial and one success. The correct way of looking at the situation is fifteen trials and one success. No one, especially at the highest level items which take forever to generate, is going to craft one item for one RE trial and if fail then craft another one.

 

Your analysis model looks at flipping a coin, noting the result, flipping the coin again and noting the result, and so on to infinity where everything just works out peachy keen. The actual model / process is filp a coin fifteen times and note if there is one success, flip the coin fifteen more times and note if there is a success, and so on to infinity where everything is peachy keen. The preceding differ in both analysis, math, and psychological impact.

 

So even the result of an education system that would not be considered a failure when applied incorrectly (wrong model) gives precise tight results that are incorrect and biased.

 

PS - I just went after a Hawkeye Implant and got it after 111 attempts. The first 110 tries were a failure (what are the odds of that?). Unfortunately model wise, I got pissed and crafted 20 of the blues overnight and then hit the Hawkeye the first thing the next morning. I was left with 19 of the blue suckers in my bag and have not sold (even though I aggressively undercut everyone on the GTN) one yet. I may just give up and RE them for scrap. How would we look at this. Did I have one success in 111 trials or one success in 130 trials? Do we add the 19 REs with 0 chance of success to our analysis?

There is no "0 chance of success".

If you re something you can not learn anything from anymore you can still get the "you already know that schematic".

And the analysis has to be based on the number of res because that's how it works. RNGesus does not care how many stuff you have crafted.

There is no "0 chance of success".

If you re something you can not learn anything from anymore you can still get the "you already know that schematic".

And the analysis has to be based on the number of res because that's how it works. RNGesus does not care how many stuff you have crafted.

LOL, there indeed is a 0% chance of success. If you define success as obtaining a schematic as a result of an RE and that RE cannot give the schematic, then there is a 0% chance of success.

For example, if someone will pay me the first time I flip a coin and get a head and never thereafter then after I get the first head, I have a 50% chance of flipping a head the next time I try and a 0% chance of getting paid for it. One may well bet on the outcome of the coin tosses until they hit their first head, but would not bet on the toss after that although they have a 50% likelihood of hitting the head each subsequent trial.

One flaw in the system is that one is forced (because of crafting time and desire for a schematic that is currently needed) to engage in more tirals than necessary since one would stop after obtaining the desired schematic. If I told you that if you can place a 25 cent bet and collect a dollar if you can toss a head, you would pop down the money. If I told you that you had to flip the coin ten times and on each flip put down 25 cents and I would only pay you a dollar the first time you hit a head, you would not take the bet. The SWTOR system forces you to make more bets than would otherwise be indicated in a sequential trial system.

Never forget that logic is part of math as well as probability and bad logic makes bad probability.

The system (SWTOR) and analysis is flawed in that it does not consider trials that will occur with a 0% (yes I said it again) chance of success.

One flaw in the system is that one is forced (because of crafting time and desire for a schematic that is currently needed) to engage in more tirals than necessary since one would stop after obtaining the desired schematic. If I told you that if you can place a 25 cent bet and collect a dollar if you can toss a head, you would pop down the money. If I told you that you had to flip the coin ten times and on each flip put down 25 cents and I would only pay you a dollar the first time you hit a head, you would not take the bet. The SWTOR system forces you to make more bets than would otherwise be indicated in a sequential trial system.

 

Never forget that logic is part of math as well as probability and bad logic makes bad probability.

 

The system (SWTOR) and analysis is flawed in that it does not consider trials that will occur with a 0% (yes I said it again) chance of success.

The easy solution to that "flaw" is small batch crafting. With greens, I will FREQUENTLY sit and wait, REing as they come in, because they only take 5 minutes to craft (send five or six companions to craft stagger them so that I can RE as they come in without risking another coming in too soon, and then cancel the rest when I get the schematic(s) I want). With blues, I will craft - at most - five per purple available. And if by some chance I get the schematic I want quickly...BLUES SELL WELL!

It is called knowing the system and working within it to its potential. If one crafts 15 knowing that they will likely get the schematic they want within 5, whose fault is that really?

No one, especially at the highest level items which take forever to generate, is going to craft one item for one RE trial and if fail then craft another one.

The term for this fallacy is: consensus over-estimation. Just in case you are interested to know I do exactly that, most times: craft one, RE, craft one, RE. Except I have stacks of mats, and am really lazy. Then I might craft two, or even three *gasp* I personally do know several crafters, who craft only one piece. And others who don't.

Of course only the ones that you actually RE with a chance at success count for the probability of... a success in RE'ing Up to you to ruin mats or not. Not like you can buy tickets from a lottery that is over, and complain that you did not win. Since you clearly know whether the lottery is over, you cannot even complain that someone sold you an outdated ticket. Except to yourself

In general:

Rule of thumb in science, and market research is 2k tries show the true distribution with solid certainty. It is a curve shaped quite like the DR curves with a soft-cap. Past 2k, additional tries do not add too much to the credibility of the data anymore, statistically speaking. Lower levels as psandak wrote, several hundreds to make a decent guess about a pattern. Below that, probabilities do indeed not mean much. (Tip: Read psandak's intro to probability. Free of charge and good )

That just means, when I do 2k REs (and I am sure I am WAY and WAY beyond that in 2 years of active crafting), success rate will be close to the true rate. Tooltip says it is 20%. If the rng is set as that, I will expect the distribution to be really close to that. The fact, that statistics is strongly counter-intuitive to the human mind has been shown over and over in the respective sciences, though. I cut everyone a lot of slack here.

My crafting defies the assertion that everyone approaches this mechanic the same. The only time I would ever craft more than 2-3 (ideally 1) of the same item is if I can still learn 2-3 schematics via RE of that item.

Too many people are RE'ing toward a single target which biases their success rate downward because they don't count the RE successes that yield a schematic they don't want, but that's your preference not a failure of probabilities.

This is what a game is about - making decisions. In RE case you choose your batch size based on what you value more - the efficiency of not crafting anything which may be proven as unnecessary or the time-cost of working on batches. using batches of 15 is hopefully hyperbole. I personally never go above 2-3, usually just micromanage with 1.

One decision is not to RE at all and go to the market - most time saved which could be used to earn more money to by next items. If you don't like meddling with RE, just don't and go kill stuff instead. Definitely we do NOT need to have the RE subgame even more simple and straightforward as it is.

The term for this fallacy is: consensus over-estimation. Just in case you are interested to know I do exactly that, most times: craft one, RE, craft one, RE. Except I have stacks of mats, and am really lazy. Then I might craft two, or even three *gasp* I personally do know several crafters, who craft only one piece. And others who don't.

 

Of course only the ones that you actually RE with a chance at success count for the probability of... a success in RE'ing Up to you to ruin mats or not. Not like you can buy tickets from a lottery that is over, and complain that you did not win. Since you clearly know whether the lottery is over, you cannot even complain that someone sold you an outdated ticket. Except to yourself

 

In general:

Rule of thumb in science, and market research is 2k tries show the true distribution with solid certainty. It is a curve shaped quite like the DR curves with a soft-cap. Past 2k, additional tries do not add too much to the credibility of the data anymore, statistically speaking. Lower levels as psandak wrote, several hundreds to make a decent guess about a pattern. Below that, probabilities do indeed not mean much. (Tip: Read psandak's intro to probability. Free of charge and good )

 

That just means, when I do 2k REs (and I am sure I am WAY and WAY beyond that in 2 years of active crafting), success rate will be close to the true rate. Tooltip says it is 20%. If the rng is set as that, I will expect the distribution to be really close to that. The fact, that statistics is strongly counter-intuitive to the human mind has been shown over and over in the respective sciences, though. I cut everyone a lot of slack here.

Good morning.

Your post (and the two following) was an eye opener for me.

My original point was simply that the sample size is the number of items crafted to be REed and not the number of trials needed to attain success. I wrote it in response to a prior post that was insulting to another forum member by referring to a failure of the education system.

Your post also makes two comments that may be construed as less than polite. Neither addressed the point.

First, "census over-estimation" is a dismissive response. Considering that you went on to talk about 2K tries showing true but based the response on your and the input of "several" others, I would think that you are short 1,990+ opinions.

Second, your Tip to read psandak's intro to probability, was less a tip and more an insult. So let's compare and see whose is bigger. I have a doctorate in mathamatics (pure not applied) and am an actuary (FSA, MAAA, MSPA, and EA). I am self employed and work as a consultant doing mathematical, legal, and administrative analysis and studies each day. I have clients throughout the country. What are your qualifications?

I should not have said that ALL people generate more than one trial at a time. I should have qualified that statement. I do suffer from a different mental disorder; confirmation bias. My life, college, grad school, business, sports, etc., has been spent among goal oriented people. Although I believe that one should enjoy the journey and exert reasonable effort, one does what it takes to get the job done within time constraints. Everyone (no need to qualify that) in "my universe" has the same mind set.

To you and the two who posted after you, I would say that I do forget that there are those who take a different approach since it is so foreign to my way of thinking. There is nothing wrong with the doing one at a time approach, but to me it just does not compute. We will never know, but it would be interesting to see how people approach the "get a schematic" process.

I have both more credits and more mats than I will ever really need. I can probably play the game without slow down for years without earning another credit or obtaining another mat. I indeed usually generate ten to fifteen items to RE, when I go after a schematic. I indeed go after schematics that I want and need. Generating schematics by producing and REing one item at a time, to my mind, seems to be a long, tedious, and drawn out process which is likely to produce the desired result way after I may need it. Mats and credites are cheap and easy, time is dear.

I have always played dps characters. To introduce variety and complement a character being played by my wife, I started leveling a Shadow Tank. I had no schematics with defensive stats when I did. My shadow is now 47 and he and Treek are fully geared (blues, purples, and even some augments) at level. I already have the schematics at purple up to level 56 for him. If I had taken the one at a time approach, where would I be now? Still trying for level 30 stuff? As an aside, I am loving the Shadow tank and somewhere down the line will compliment him with a Sith Assassin.

To each, his/her own.

LOL, there indeed is a 0% chance of success. If you define success as obtaining a schematic as a result of an RE and that RE cannot give the schematic, then there is a 0% chance of success.

 

For example, if someone will pay me the first time I flip a coin and get a head and never thereafter then after I get the first head, I have a 50% chance of flipping a head the next time I try and a 0% chance of getting paid for it. One may well bet on the outcome of the coin tosses until they hit their first head, but would not bet on the toss after that although they have a 50% likelihood of hitting the head each subsequent trial.

 

One flaw in the system is that one is forced (because of crafting time and desire for a schematic that is currently needed) to engage in more tirals than necessary since one would stop after obtaining the desired schematic. If I told you that if you can place a 25 cent bet and collect a dollar if you can toss a head, you would pop down the money. If I told you that you had to flip the coin ten times and on each flip put down 25 cents and I would only pay you a dollar the first time you hit a head, you would not take the bet. The SWTOR system forces you to make more bets than would otherwise be indicated in a sequential trial system.

 

Never forget that logic is part of math as well as probability and bad logic makes bad probability.

 

The system (SWTOR) and analysis is flawed in that it does not consider trials that will occur with a 0% (yes I said it again) chance of success.

It's not swtor's flaw, it's yours. If you want only one schematic, and you choose to craft more than one item, you are accepting the "risk" that one or more of the items you craft will be unsuitable for the purposes of reverse engineering for a schematic. You have to judge, on an item by item basis, whether the material cost, suitability for other purposes (such as sale on the GTN), time sensitivity of acquisition of the desired schematic, etc. justify the production of more units than are strictly necessary. Just like if a mob has low hp, you can choose between using an expensive attack that may do much more damage than necessary or a cheaper ability that may barely be able to kill it if you are really lucky. It's called playing the game.

The problem with your logic (which I'll call "Asbalana's Fallacy", since I don't recall seeing anybody make this mistake before) is that you are not looking at the probabilities correctly. If an item has a 20% chance to RE, it has an 80% chance to "fail". If you RE 15 items, you have a 0.8 exp 15 (~3.5%) chance to fail, or a 96.5% chance to succeed. However, that 96.5% chance includes every possible outcome (other than all failures), so succeeding on one or more attempts before RE'ing all fifteen items is not only possible, but quite likely.

In fact, rather than complain about the system, you should try to appreciate its benefits. Rather than just pay for all 15 items at once and then make one roll with a 96.5% chance, you pay for the 15 items up front but then only use as many is necessary to get the schematic, and you have the unused items to RE just for mats, sell to vendor, sell to other players, or use for you own characters, thus defraying your initial investment.

A few comments:

1) If you are trying to get a specific schematic just to make a single item for immediate use, it will probably be more cost efficient just to buy the item on the GTN.

2) If you are looking to get a specific schematic to make a single item for immediate use and future sales, your initial investment will be higher, but if you picked a profitable item, you should be able to recover that investment in a reasonable period of time (and if you factor schematic acquisition cost in your profitability calculations, the fixed initial investment cost will tend towards zero with each [profitable] item you sell.

3) If you are a completionist just trying to get every schematic, you can reduce the cost to acquire by simply making one at a time.

4) If you are just looking to make money (i.e., you don't need to make the item for immediate use), you can just decide for yourself each time you go to craft items to RE if you think that the cost of making more than one item is or is not justified by the potential reduction of time-to-market.

5) The vast majority of "extra" items can be sold for at least the cost to create regardless of whether or not you'd actually want to craft them *just* to sell.

LOL, there indeed is a 0% chance of success. If you define success as obtaining a schematic as a result of an RE and that RE cannot give the schematic, then there is a 0% chance of success.

 

For example, if someone will pay me the first time I flip a coin and get a head and never thereafter then after I get the first head, I have a 50% chance of flipping a head the next time I try and a 0% chance of getting paid for it. One may well bet on the outcome of the coin tosses until they hit their first head, but would not bet on the toss after that although they have a 50% likelihood of hitting the head each subsequent trial.

 

One flaw in the system is that one is forced (because of crafting time and desire for a schematic that is currently needed) to engage in more tirals than necessary since one would stop after obtaining the desired schematic. If I told you that if you can place a 25 cent bet and collect a dollar if you can toss a head, you would pop down the money. If I told you that you had to flip the coin ten times and on each flip put down 25 cents and I would only pay you a dollar the first time you hit a head, you would not take the bet. The SWTOR system forces you to make more bets than would otherwise be indicated in a sequential trial system.

 

Never forget that logic is part of math as well as probability and bad logic makes bad probability.

 

The system (SWTOR) and analysis is flawed in that it does not consider trials that will occur with a 0% (yes I said it again) chance of success.

In your example, you would still have a 50% chance to get head. And that's how the system works.

Step 1: The Server generates a random number from 1-5.

Step 2: If the number is 5, it's success, else failure.

Step 3: If it is a success, the server will give you one of the availabe schmatics. If you can't learn anything from the item you re'd, you won't get a schematic, but the roll itself was a success.

The success here is NOT obtaining a schematic, it is rolling the 5.

LOL, there indeed is a 0% chance of success. If you define success as obtaining a schematic as a result of an RE and that RE cannot give the schematic, then there is a 0% chance of success.

No, there is not. In fact, if you already know the schematic, the system tells you there is "no information" so if you continue to RE you're just not paying attention. All these contrary viewpoints expressed on this thread share the same flaw. They rely on anecdotal experience as THE conclusion to RE'ing. As psandek and several others have pointed out, as your sample size gets larger, your results approach the expected 20%. In 100 attempts, you may not see it. In 1,000 attempts you pretty well will. In 10,000 attempts, it will be there, period. End of story. It may be 19.5% or it may be 20.5%, but the more attempts you make, the closer it will be to actually 20%.

The larger the sample size, the smaller the "confidence level." That's why a properly conducted poll of voters can predict election results. For the entire USA it takes about 2,000 people to make a prediction that is 95% accurate. In other words, there would be a 5% chance that the results are attributable to chance. With a larger sample size the confidence reduces to 1%, i.e.: The results would be attributable to chance 1% of the time, or 1 in 100 polling attempts. Still larger, then the confidence level is fractional. At a certain point it is more cost-effective to go with a larger confidence level because of diminishing returns. The point is that you can never predict an individual result, but collectively, statistics works.

I say the education system is a failure because so many people not only do not understand statistics, they do so willfully, insisting the system is somehow "broken' when they have an anecdotally bad experience. It is not, and your belligerence in insisting that it is simply shows your ignorance. There is nothing wrong with ignorance per se unless you are unwilling to remedy the situation with further education.

The RE system in this game is NOT broken. It does not need to be "fixed" because it is working as intended. The fact that you don't think it is is really irrelevant to the issue. If you continue to refuse to see this, it is really YOUR problem--not Bioware's, and not anyone else's.

Asbalana and eartharioch,

I think we can agree that we have beaten the statistical horse to death. I quote Don Henley (Garden of Allah):

"...I will testify for you, I'm a gun for hire, I'm a saint, I'm a liar'"

"'Because there are no facts, there is no truth

Just data to be manipulated

I can get you any result you like

What's it worth to you?'"

"'Because there is no wrong, there is no right..."

My point is that BOTH of you are statistically correct...depending on how one looks at the issue.

As JohnnyRay points out, The RE system is not pure mathematics or logic; there is a psychological factor as well. The task before us now is convincing the masses that what we have is better than any alternative. Back to math we go...

What are the alternatives?

The most commonly requested alternative is an increasing success chance: fail at 20% your next attempt is 25%, etc. Well assuming that the Devs truly desire an overall 20% success rate (for whatever reason), then an increasing chance from 20% is not going to work because doing so in fact increases the overall success rate above 20% (even an increment of 1% per failure results in a 23% success rate)

So the next logical option is to decrease the base chance and increase from there. The flaw in that design is that while long failure streaks are averted (because one eventually gets a 100% chance to succeed), so are quick successes; one is more likely to require more attempts to get a success. And the most common point of success is still at 20% (based on the model I created)

Furthermore, implementing an increasing success rate is not as easy as some would think. Primary among the pitfalls is how would the system handle REing different items: would it keep track of each or would it reset when one changes items? While tracking every item is doable, it is complicated, and we KNOW that resetting on change WILL draw complaints.

Another option submitted is a vendor where one turns in crafted items to get schematics for superior items: greens for blue, blues for purple. The obstacle here is how to handle the randomness of going from green to three blues and blue to three or five purples. Some suggest drop the randomness: craft 5 greens get the blue schematic you want; craft 5 blues get the purple schematic you want. Others suggest a lockbox with one of the possible blues or purples; but what happens if you get a schematic you already have? Still others suggest simply multiply the numbers and get all the schematics: if there are three blues, craft 15 greens to get all three blues in one shot.

The flaw in the vendor option is that everyone can get every schematic in a fixed number of craftings. Some would say that's fine with them. But part of the current system assumes that not everyone will have every schematic. This encourages trade between players. Granted there are those who seek all (desirable) schematics and invest the time and game currency to accomplish this goal. However, most here would probably be surprised how few actually do this. Making is easier would encourage players to get all the schematics thereby making having all schematics less valuable.

Is there an option I missed? Do you disagree with my reasons why alternatives are not as good as what we have?

Good morning.

I should have qualified that statement. I do suffer from a different mental disorder; confirmation bias. My life, college, grad school, business, sports, etc., has been spent among goal oriented people. Although I believe that one should enjoy the journey and exert reasonable effort, one does what it takes to get the job done within time constraints. Everyone (no need to qualify that) in "my universe" has the same mind set.

As a math doctorate you know and enjoy creating the structures to have the perfect beauty (and I totally enjoy that as well) but you did miss the game-design principle that if getting an achievement is 100% certain, it is not longer felt as an achievement. Just pressing 20 times this button and 20 times that other button and have 100% probability to get where you want - next step would be to "streamline" this to "single-click for schematic X". Result - no effort, no achievement, every player having all the same EQ.

In real life (and in SWTOR) you have a world that has it's own rules. While you may know of a better ruleset to suite your preferences - it does not matter to the game. Goal-oriented people build their strategy based on the rules as they are. Working in batches is not efficient on resources - this is by design to give advantage to players willing to put in more time. If you want a guarantee for getting a scehamatic in X steps then sorry - you can't.

Ofc we can and should propose improvements and some of them MAY be picked up by devs. This confirmed result is definitely NOT going to be picked up. BW has to think about how to balance effort required to get to getting an achievement. In RE case, the game already is too easy.

(.. and, let's not get too emotional. A verbal fight is always much better in RL, not on forums)