Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3 11 12 13
Results 121 to 128 of 128

Thread: I am greatly disappointed by the keys / chest system, tons of duplicates!

  1. #121
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    387
    Actually, it is said that there is "Bundles", so there will be different chests eith different items for one hero. Also, there is ~100 heroes, so there will be 100 different chests. It's meant not to open similar chests.

  2. #122
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by St0l3n_ID View Post
    -,- Just read my post the right way, then at least try to understand or learn proper math...
    Theres an difference between chance an probabilty (what is what we're talking about). The chance stays the same, BUT in fact the probability does increase, i clearly stated that in my post...
    (The probability of an single toss would equal the chance, however the we're talking abuot multiple tosses, what changes the probility but not the chance, think of probabilty as "likleyness" if it helps u in any way)
    I know its hard to understand if u havent learned it in school, but just cause you dont know stochastics doenst mean im wrong
    Please refrain from insulting people by assuming that they did not know anything from school.

    Your stochastics in probability theory is just a theory among others. You're simply substituting one for the other making everything contrary to it seem false. There's a reason why it's still a theory. These methods are also employed on the stock market analysis and they are not as reliable as to consistently create millionaires from people who subscribe to it. I do however find much more sense in the existence of the gambler's fallacy and the essence that a run of luck in the past somehow influences the odds in the future, is the fallacy

    A joke told among mathematicians demonstrates the nature of the fallacy. When flying on an aircraft, a man decides to always bring a bomb with him. "The chances of an aircraft having a bomb on it are very small," he reasons, "and certainly the chances of having two are almost none!"

  3. #123
    @markcocjin
    I was not insulting, but i was reacting to plain contra without any reasoning or explanation.
    Crux has statet the gamblers fallacy as argument (as well as you did now, but havent done previously), however you said it yourself that both Bernoulli what i'm basing calculations on ( or at least tried to explain maths made from previous posters) and the fallacy are both just theories.

    Him stating that im wrong is as wrong as me stating he would be wrong, the difference here is that i responded to an unexplained post, while he must have seen that my maths is based on bernoulli (i clearly statet that).
    If someone simply contradicts posts without explaining himself, I'M feeling insulted. Thats why my second response was more harshly

    I cant say its wrong to rely on the gamblers fallacy however i'n my understanding of stochastics, the binominal distribution makes perfectly sense and the fallacy is basicly reducing probabilty back to chance and therefore anihilates the whole concept to be of no further use. And im by far not the only math-guy who uses bernoulli

    Given by your post at the last site, i had to assume that you didnt know bernoulli, and therefore took my time and tried to explain it. I wanted to help here and not being told "You're plain wrong" just cause someone uses another theorem considering it the only true one and not explaining what his math is based on.


    Again: I wanted to explain the previous posters math, but thats hard if people jump into conversation without an proper explanation of their arguments.
    You can belive me that my post would've been way nicer if crux would have actually responded to my post instead of just posting without "evidence" (cant come up with the right word sorry ;D )
    Last edited by St0l3n_ID; 06-22-2012 at 02:15 AM.
    Multi-Game Modder, Programmer...

    My brain wont always communicate with the rest of my body...

  4. #124
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    15
    for your reference

    in tf2 u can trash 2 item into 1 scrap metal
    3 scrap metal into a reclaim metal
    3 reclaim metal into a refine metal

    1 key = 2.5 refine metal

    TF2 reference
    tf2spreadsheet.blogspot.com <--- current reference
    http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Mann_Co._Supply_Crate <---- current drop

    DOTA 2 reference
    http://www.dota2wiki.com/wiki/Treasure_Chests <--- crate details & drop%

    basically Or an Exceedingly Rare Special Item! is only 1% chance or so

  5. #125
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by St0l3n_ID View Post
    @markcocjin
    I cant say its wrong to rely on the gamblers fallacy however i'n my understanding of stochastics, the binominal distribution makes perfectly sense and the fallacy is basicly reducing probabilty back to chance and therefore anihilates the whole concept to be of no further use. And im by far not the only math-guy who uses bernoulli
    Stochastics is an objective field in mathematics, there are no opinions and you haven't provided anything to disprove the gambler's fallacy. You are just stating your opinion which is based on a clear misunderstanding of probability.

    Let me phrase your misunderstanding in simple words for you:
    Assuming you have a perfect coin with a 50-50 chance for either heads or tails and throw that coin 4 times, resulting in 4 times tails, is there any, any change at all to the coin which would change the 50-50 chance on the next throw?
    Last edited by Crux; 06-22-2012 at 02:27 AM.

  6. #126
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Crux View Post
    Stochastics is an objective field in mathematics, there are no opinions and you haven't provided anything to disprove the gambler's fallacy. You are just stating your opinion which is based on a clear misunderstanding of probability.

    Let me phrase your misunderstanding in simple words for you:
    Assuming you have a perfect coin with a 50-50 chance for either heads or tails and throw that coin 4 times, resulting in 4 times tails, is there any, any change at all to the coin which would change the 50-50 chance on the next throw?
    The equation to calculate probability that I gave is not blinded by gambler's fallacy, gambler's fallacy requires a human mind to perceive that the odds must make something happen the next time based off past results. The probability calculations are numbers, and as shown do not just automatically ratchet up. By the 10th shot with a 7% chance item the odds haven't become 70-71%, they're still stuck at just over 50%.

    Flipping a coin 5 times, probability calculations would say that you're 96.8% likely to have hit a chosen head or tails by that time. The odds of not hitting your chosen side in five attempts at a 50/50 game are less than 3%. The 3% does still hit occasionally, so then there's the 6th attempt which probability calculations would suggest a 98.4% chance. 7th = 99.2%. etc.

    Someone with gamblers fallacy might think that if they got 6 tails in a row that the 7th one MUST be a heads, but probability would suggest that there'd still be a 0.78125% chance that 7 tails in a row would happen in a 50/50 odds game.

    It's the same thing with lottery draws, the odds of getting 1 ball out of 52 then another 1 ball out of 52 then another... that's how they calculate your base probabilities. It's multiplication. You can do the same thing with card games, this is how people used to game the system in Vegas before they started adding in multiple decks and reshuffling at the start of every game.

    Getting back to the point of this entire thread though, the very simple fix for this is simply adding a few more words to the description to reveal that odds are weighted by rarity. They don't have to give away the exact odds of each item if they don't want to, but it should be clear that there is not an even odds chance of any of the items inside.
    Last edited by Ohmwrecker; 06-22-2012 at 09:54 AM.

  7. #127
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    9
    Your assumptions only hold true if there were a definite amount of chests, you had access to all the available chests and you were the only one actually opening chests.

  8. #128
    I sort of hate to bring a thread where people are throwing spreadsheets at each other back to life (and I haven't the foggiest idea which of the 'I hate the key and chest system' threads to choose), but I thought I'd offer my experience as a relatively new player to the game:

    I've received a number of crates, opened a few of them, and have decided not to open any crates I have opened before due to the fact I've received two duplicates. Having read the previous discussion about the TF2 economy (incidentally, one in which I have not bought a key, though did get a pass for Mann vs. Machine), I understand there may be 'teething problems' but here are what I see as the biggest difficulties with the system as it is now.

    I understand the need for the rarity of some items (and thus, duplicates are inevitable) and that trading enables me to get rid of my duplicate items, but the cost of opening a chest now is not $2.49, but $2.49 plus the cost of my time to arrange a trade (time that could be spent playing Dota 2, or trying to piece together whatever fragments of a social/student life I have since jumping back into video games). This is perplexing because my inventory isn't all that large, and there are many heroes that I don't have items for.

    The bigger problem I have is that I don't know of a really great resource for trading. As the items in the chest are non-marketable (probably best as the value of these drops would likely be far less than the cost of the key given the complaints of duplicates), I must rely on a third-party service to find a trade (presently I've used a website dota-trade). My next difficulty is that I'm not really sure what's available, so I have often tried to just skim over people who have requested the item I have and see if there is an equivalent rare item that I think looks worthwhile.

    The fact that I don't really know the 'value' of my non-marketable item isn't a major concern for me, as I should really only be trading for things that I actually want, but this is a factor in trading with other people. Compounding this problem is that I am largely ignorant of what is available (to my dismay, Vengeful Spirit appears to be without any items) and so can't express my preferences as fully as if I had a more standardized system of saying "one of [item I don't really care for] will get me [item] for [hero X]." Finally, this system has me messaging multiple people with offers which, depending on how timely someone replies, likely leads to disappointment.

    In essence, the current means of trading seems quite inefficient and is probably the number one reason I'm not inclined to buying keys for chests that I have already opened once. If I had a better way of finding out what was available and a somewhat more reliable way of trading, I'd be more inclined to buy more keys (which, presumably, is a benefit to anyone except maybe the statisticians who need to reevaluate the rarity of everything due to more sales).

    On a constructive note, I do think that Valve has done well with something like the Market. The market does not rely on both parties being online in order for the transaction to be done. It'd be interesting if, on a given item, the listings for the market could be included as well, and there be an added trading option. I realize for the market option to be presented along side the 'new' item potentially means lost revenue for Valve, but presumably they would not prefer to profit from players hanging onto items that they don't want (ie. It seems to me better that people who want keys buy it from those who have keys and don't want them, than it is for new keys to be generated). Likewise, if I put an item up for 'trade' I could specify what items I would 'automatically' accept (so, say, I put my Raven Scythe up for trade and say that if someone wants to exchange The Peacebringer, automatically accept the trade), otherwise, I'd be messaged with the offer so I could accept or modify it without needing to be at the keyboard when my potential partner is trading.

    This would also get rid of a somewhat irritating trend in a few of the matches I've watched where the public chat gets spammed with offers for trade. It's easy enough to turn off the chat, but, as with the suggestions above, it seems that moves towards facilitating interaction in the community (more viable options to trade, removing chat spam and pairing me with people who have equal interests) are more desirable than ones that distance me from it (blocking out spam etc.).

    Finally, should this concern be motivated by a lack of understanding of the trading system, I'd certainly love a reply, link, or private message directing me to some good resources. In this case, the concern would be shifted simply to information regarding the trading system, rather than a problem with the system itself (the trading forum has been an exercise in futility so far, so I am aware of that).
    Last edited by systemchalk; 09-03-2013 at 04:52 PM. Reason: Tidying up the typos I should have proofread in the first place (and left the ones I'm too ignorant to find in)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •