YAY! =D> \

 

I used to anxiously wait for the one article we got every week, now we get four!

 

 

 

Anyway, I quite liked the "The Joy of a Quest" article, bthe Probability and the History one were also interesting. I'm not a huge fan of fictional articles usually, but as long as we still get another main topic, it makes a good extra read :thumbsup:

They were all good, but I liked The Joy Of Quest best, it's all true! :o

YAY! =D> \

 

I used to anxiously wait for the one article we got every week, now we get four!

 

 

 

 

Glad you are enjoying! :D Just wanted to note that every week will vary. Some weeks may only have 1 articles while others may have 5! As the writers start becoming more acquainted with the schedule or more writers are invited, a more exact expecting dates for articles will become made. ;)

The probability of a d chain drop is 1/15000 (I think), and each Dust Devil you kill has that probability. Does the person who kills 30,000 of them, have the same chance of getting a D Chain (or three) the person who kills a hundred on a slayer task.

 

The chance of killing 30,000 and getting a d chain is 1-(14999/15000)^30000, or 86.47% and the chance of killing 100 and getting a d chain is 1-(14999/15000)^100, or .66%

well i'm not gonna complain about my runescape luck, as i seem to have a lot of it; apposed to the real world where i seem to have a negative luck value -.-

 

 

 

examples of my luck:

 

* i got a dchain on my 50th kill in my slayer task and again on the 102th same task \

 

* 3 bandos platedrops in a team; too bad no cs so i didn't see anything of it, but i still got mills worth of ls karma :

 

*back in the golden days of trading, i once sold 300 blood runes for 5k natures, i think it was an accident on his part, but who cares; that bought me my whip when it still was like 2m :thumbsup:

edit: great articles!

Reply to: >>>Featured Article: The Curse of Probabilistic Knowledge (stormveritas)<<<

 

 

 

I only have 1 thing to say (sorry if it's against the rules):

 

 

 

The Secret! (Sorry for the hebrew subtitles, it's the only 1 I could find for free).

Got caught up in my probability rant I forgot to mention that the other articles were excellent.

 

 

 

Especially war running, I can see that developing into a weekly feature

 

All those possible paths.. Got me hooked already =)

 

 

 

Probably one of the best written Runescape stories I've ever read, especially the way you used the runescape geography as a life size scaled up world, and the believable characters.

 

 

 

Excellent work =D>

The chance of getting a drop actually does go up as you kill monsters (depending on how you look at). Yes, each individual kill (or toss, I'm going to use that coin metaphor) has an independent chance of 1/1000 depending on the drop, (or 1/2) so your chances are better the more times you kill something (or toss). Lets say you flip a coin looking for at least one heads. Your chances of getting a head are better if you flip the coin three times as opposed to one. This is pretty logical, and most people understand this concept, but I think, over the years, this basic idea has been skewed, and people grow to feel they are "overdue" for a drop (or that long awaited heads : ).

 

 

 

Erm I dont know what logic you learnt but when each outcome is independent of the other the probabilities don't change

 

 

 

If you flip a coin once you've got 1/2 chance of a heads

 

Flip it twice you've got a 2/4 chance which is the same as 1/2

 

3 times gives 3/6 which again is 1/2

 

 

 

It's only in cases where each outcome removes something the odds change.

 

Eg if you had a bag of 10 balls, 5 red 5 blue and want a red

 

On the first withdrawal you do have a 5/10 or 1/2 chance of red

 

But if you get a blue then on your second try you have a 5/9 chance of red

 

get another blue and the odds shift to 5/8

 

 

 

For drops in rs there is nothing to suggest or otherwise prove that drops are affected by previous drops, other than in pking.

 

This means no matter how many beasties you smash you STILL have the exact same odds of that drop as u did on the first one u killed.

 

The only truth in the matter is that the more you kill the more likely you are to aqqire all the possible outcomes and hence get the drop

Read my post before you argue that

I liked to read "Curse of propabilities" however might be the wrong game to write it in, this here is infested with teenagers below 15, who cannot understand the simplicity of the sentence "Approximately 1/10000 gets Dragon Chain from Dust Devils".....

 

 

 

Otherwise, common sense rocks. good article.

I loved the articles, especially 'The Joy of a Quest', but I'd like to make a point about the 'Backseat History' article.

 

 

 

Jagex is not being unintentionally sloppy with their history, they often provide alternate viewpoints on the same historical event with contradicting pieces of information. This is exactly how many real-life events are recorded too. Jagex certainly doesn't intend to tell the whole truth (or sometimes any of it) in every single bit of dialogue; that just wouldn't be proper history.

 

 

 

For example, it's intentional that the priest at Lumbridge claims that Saradomin created the world and all that is in it, followed by claims elsewhere that Guthix created and filled the world. Finally, in Meeting History, it's told that some Elder Gods created the world and Guthix filled it. This is not sloppy, it's just History.

Trueffully, These reads were more boring than most i have read. I didn`t enjoyn 1 of them and just about opened the last 1. If the tip.it times stays like this, then i might have to stop reading it :o

enjoyed them all,especially the quest one : :)

Great articles, all of them. The Joys Of Quest was the best in my opinion, i love quests and the writer said exactly what i think about them, especially when you know others who hate questing. I wish i could send them that message as soon as they start to complain or ask you several months later (when they bother to do the next one in the storyline) what they're all talking about. I repeat, great articles. :thumbsup: :

The chance of getting a drop actually does go up as you kill monsters (depending on how you look at). Yes, each individual kill (or toss, I'm going to use that coin metaphor) has an independent chance of 1/1000 depending on the drop, (or 1/2) so your chances are better the more times you kill something (or toss). Lets say you flip a coin looking for at least one heads. Your chances of getting a head are better if you flip the coin three times as opposed to one. This is pretty logical, and most people understand this concept, but I think, over the years, this basic idea has been skewed, and people grow to feel they are "overdue" for a drop (or that long awaited heads : ).

 

 

 

Erm I dont know what logic you learnt but when each outcome is independent of the other the probabilities don't change

 

 

 

If you flip a coin once you've got 1/2 chance of a heads

 

Flip it twice you've got a 2/4 chance which is the same as 1/2

 

3 times gives 3/6 which again is 1/2

 

 

 

It's only in cases where each outcome removes something the odds change.

 

Eg if you had a bag of 10 balls, 5 red 5 blue and want a red

 

On the first withdrawal you do have a 5/10 or 1/2 chance of red

 

But if you get a blue then on your second try you have a 5/9 chance of red

 

get another blue and the odds shift to 5/8

 

 

 

For drops in rs there is nothing to suggest or otherwise prove that drops are affected by previous drops, other than in pking.

 

This means no matter how many beasties you smash you STILL have the exact same odds of that drop as u did on the first one u killed.

 

The only truth in the matter is that the more you kill the more likely you are to aqqire all the possible outcomes and hence get the drop

 

Paw claw, there is a mathematical formula for this kind of stuff. When each flip is viewed on its own, there is the equal 1/2 chance it will be heads. But if it is viewed over time, say, chances that you will flip at least one heads in 10 flips, it is:

 

 

 

1-(odds against)^total flips

 

 

 

So, the chances of flipping a heads in 10 coin flips is 1-(1/2)^10, or 99.9%.

I loved the articles, especially 'The Joy of a Quest', but I'd like to make a point about the 'Backseat History' article.

 

 

 

Jagex is not being unintentionally sloppy with their history, they often provide alternate viewpoints on the same historical event with contradicting pieces of information. This is exactly how many real-life events are recorded too. Jagex certainly doesn't intend to tell the whole truth (or sometimes any of it) in every single bit of dialogue; that just wouldn't be proper history.

 

 

 

For example, it's intentional that the priest at Lumbridge claims that Saradomin created the world and all that is in it, followed by claims elsewhere that Guthix created and filled the world. Finally, in Meeting History, it's told that some Elder Gods created the world and Guthix filled it. This is not sloppy, it's just History.

 

 

 

I do know that occasionally Jagex will present conflicting historical stories, however in the example you provided, and in many other examples, there is a reason for it. The Priest in Lumbridge says that Saradomin created Gielinor because that is what he was told. It was a lie told by Saradomin himself and passed down by his followers and priests. How could they know any better, and why would they doubt their God? This historical contradiction is one that is made intentionally because it serves to develop Saradomin's personality. It is also interesting to note that the priest is in Lumbridge and will probably be among the first NPCs that new players talk to. That said, the Priest would provide his own biased view of how Gielinor was created. Initially the new player would accept this without question, but as they do quests and explore RuneScape, they would learn things that would lead them to question if things really were how the Priest said they were...

 

 

 

So just because two stories conflict, it does not mean that its sloppy. Its often an interesting and multi-dimensional plot device. But in the example I provided, and in a few others I can't immediately recall, there seems to be no reason. Due to the massive amount of evidence supporting it, we can assume that the Dragonkin are the creators of dragon weapons. So the question is, was the Frenaskrae reference an intentional contradiction? If so, why? What would the fairy have to gain by saying they were from Frenaskrae? What would the Mahjarrat (the only confirmed beings from Frenaskrae) have to gain by saying they created the weapons? The Mahjarrat are known for their incredible power with magicks, not their prowess with a blade. Furthermore, nearby the fairy that says dragon weapons come from Frenaskrae is a fairy who was released with the Impetuous Impulses Minigame. This fairy follows the "new" history of Dragon weapons, that they were made by the Dragonkin, although she calls them by their true name, Necrosyrtes. Why would these two fairies believe two different stories about the origin of dragon weapons, especially when there really is nothing to be gained from lying?

 

 

 

Also, don't think that I am unduly critical of Jagex for being sloppy. I have no experience in programming, and cannot even begin to imagine how difficult is is to make a game like RuneScape, much less remembering to update every little bit of dialogue every time they change something. I only presented that information to show a complication that comes with trying to learn the history of RuneScape.

 

Paw claw, there is a mathematical formula for this kind of stuff. When each flip is viewed on its own, there is the equal 1/2 chance it will be heads. But if it is viewed over time, say, chances that you will flip at least one heads in 10 flips, it is:

 

 

 

1-(odds against)^total flips

 

 

 

So, the chances of flipping a heads in 10 coin flips is 1-(1/2)^10, or 99.9%.

 

 

 

This is something we discussed when this was being screened/edited.

 

 

 

For clarification, I was simply saying that given you've already flipped nine heads, the odds that your next toss will be a head is still 50/50 (given that it is a "fair" die).

 

 

 

I certainly agree that the odds of getting a given drop/reward over a number of trials will always increase when more trials are presented. It's the very existence of this dichotomy that makes the independent trial law so much more interesting.

 

 

 

I enjoyed hearing that I have never taken a physics class, although the school that gave me an MS degree in Engineering probably would not.

 

Paw claw, there is a mathematical formula for this kind of stuff. When each flip is viewed on its own, there is the equal 1/2 chance it will be heads. But if it is viewed over time, say, chances that you will flip at least one heads in 10 flips, it is:

 

 

 

1-(odds against)^total flips

 

 

 

So, the chances of flipping a heads in 10 coin flips is 1-(1/2)^10, or 99.9%.

 

 

 

This is something we discussed when this was being screened/edited.

 

 

 

For clarification, I was simply saying that given you've already flipped nine heads, the odds that your next toss will be a head is still 50/50 (given that it is a "fair" die).

 

 

 

I certainly agree that the odds of getting a given drop/reward over a number of trials will always increase when more trials are presented. It's the very existence of this dichotomy that makes the independent trial law so much more interesting.

 

 

 

I enjoyed hearing that I have never taken a physics class, although the school that gave me an MS degree in Engineering probably would not.

 

Err... What school did you go to? The current thesis regarding coin flips is that there is a natural bias for heads based on the way a human flips it and the way the coin is facing, the actual probability is .51 for heads ;) .This may,however, be a more recent discovery.

 

Paw claw, there is a mathematical formula for this kind of stuff. When each flip is viewed on its own, there is the equal 1/2 chance it will be heads. But if it is viewed over time, say, chances that you will flip at least one heads in 10 flips, it is:

 

 

 

1-(odds against)^total flips

 

 

 

So, the chances of flipping a heads in 10 coin flips is 1-(1/2)^10, or 99.9%.

 

 

 

This is something we discussed when this was being screened/edited.

 

 

 

For clarification, I was simply saying that given you've already flipped nine heads, the odds that your next toss will be a head is still 50/50 (given that it is a "fair" die).

 

 

 

I certainly agree that the odds of getting a given drop/reward over a number of trials will always increase when more trials are presented. It's the very existence of this dichotomy that makes the independent trial law so much more interesting.

 

 

 

I enjoyed hearing that I have never taken a physics class, although the school that gave me an MS degree in Engineering probably would not.

 

Err... What school did you go to? The current thesis regarding coin flips is that there is a natural bias for heads based on the way a human flips it and the way the coin is facing, the actual probability is .51 for heads ;) .This may,however, be a more recent discovery.

 

 

 

 

 

But then again not everybody is using the same type of coin ;)

Even if each drop is independent, law of averages puts the items at a certain drop rate. Best example is abyssal whip. Say 100 people kill 20k abby demons each. If jagex put a number of 1/500 on it then all 100 people will converge on 40 whips each with maybe 5-10 as the standard error(give or take).

 

Err... What school did you go to? The current thesis regarding coin flips is that there is a natural bias for heads based on the way a human flips it and the way the coin is facing, the actual probability is .51 for heads ;) .This may,however, be a more recent discovery.

 

 

 

The "natural bias" is nonsense. The differential is based on starting side (do you flip with heads/tails up), weight of offset sides (is the "head" deco more or less heavy than tail imprint?), height of toss and element of cheating. This doesn't begin to account for left vs. right hand, different coins, and coin disclosure style (catch, catch and flip, allow to hit ground).

 

 

 

Too many variables, and 0.01 is a huge discrepancy from commonly held 0.50. If you're claiming that, show your sources, or go back to discussing topics at hand.

I would just like to compliment Necromagus on some superior writing. All the articles were great, but Necromagus produced what I'd consider an excellent draft.

Rune plate was 64k on RSC, I do recall however....I think when RS2 came out it went to 80-85k? I cannot recall exactly....something about making dragon slayer easier because you could buy the map piece off the goblin, instead of training your magic up to use telekinetic grab to get it....so they boost the price because it is easier....hmm....probably in the news archive somewhere....runewiki doesn't have mention of the history of the rune plate...."trails off in thought"

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways, good articles, what's with the second one about saying monkmadness and 3 digit combat levels....not many people I know of (who aren't lazy) complete the quest after 100 combat even.

 

 

 

Anyways...as always tipit articles cement the authors thoughts upon an analysis of something...it all boils down to the "just enjoy the gameplay" philosophy that nearly all articles are about.

 

 

 

:mrgreen:

i don't like the new style :o